Hard Light Productions Forums

Site Management => Site Support / Feedback => Topic started by: Axem on October 17, 2020, 07:02:03 pm

Title: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Axem on October 17, 2020, 07:02:03 pm
To the HLP Community,

We understand recent events involving a locked and deleted thread and the actions of the staff have been frustrating and difficult for everyone.  We want to thank you for your patience while the administrators and global moderators resolved this issue.  Moderating staff have the obligation to act impartially in their duties and to bring in other staff when they cannot.  Clearly this rule was violated in the recently deleted thread in Political Discussions, and this has understandably led to hard feelings.  This is not a situation where platitudes are appropriate, and we are announcing the following measures and changes, effective immediately:

1.  All active staff have reaffirmed the commitment that they will not moderate disputes they are involved in, period.
2.  Staff, like all members of the community will be expected to use the Report Post function to handle disputes with other members or moderation of issues in which they are directly involved.  As we have a relatively small number of staff and - in Political Discussions in particular - we can often have many actively in a discussion, staff will be permitted to temporarily lock threads until other impartial moderators can respond to reports.  ALL staff have committed to the principle that their influence should be to de-escalate disputes.
3.  Future community moderation in General Discussion and Political Discussion will be undertaken by a minimum of two staff working together in agreement.  This may result in more temporary locks as cool-down periods on highly charged issues while staff can respond.  No single person will have final say or act unilaterally.
4.  Staff are developing a more comprehensive guidance on what constitutes a personal attack.  This can be subjective, and that can clearly lead to issues.  More information on this measure will follow.
5.  With regard to the deleted thread, selected posts from the thread relevant to the original topic and subsequent discussion will be restored and the thread will be reopened for discussion.  A group of three staff not otherwise involved as participants in the thread will determine which posts are to be restored.  Due to personal schedules of the three staff involved, this may take a few days.
6.  Goober5000 will be separately posting an apology to the community regarding his actions in particular.
7.  Goober5000 will no longer be engaged in moderation duties in General Discussion and Political Discussion until otherwise specified.

Also we all apologize for the amount of time this has taken to get resolved.  What happened was a very serious issue and it was only right to not rush it or be done by just a few people.  We reached out to as many other staff members as we could to get their input and insight, and unfortunately everyone isn't as active or around as they used to be.  Having a clear consensus from the staff was very important to get this resolved.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 17, 2020, 07:07:41 pm
I'm glad you've come to a balanced resolution to the issue by splitting it into a number of sub-issues and finding a detailed workaround for each one of them. No major revolutions involved in the process, and no more drama.

I'm also glad we have all finally realized how intrinsically "dangerous" GD/PD boards are on a forum trying to keep a 20 years old game alive.

 :yes:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 17, 2020, 07:09:53 pm
Sounds good to me :yes:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 17, 2020, 07:17:44 pm
This is an enormous effort for a single purpose: protecting Goober’s pride and status. None of the other moderators have ever abused their powers this grievously, and none of these measures are necessary for any but Goober. None of this effort was expended to retain Rian, to retain Scotty, to retain anyone who may have silently left the community because of Goober’s openly misogynistic, white nationalist views being aired all over the place and defended by endless rules lawyering. None of this effort was expended to keep me sweet any of the several times I acted out, sometimes in laughably trivial ways*, and got punished for it; and I never asked for or expected it. No regular user would ever get such favourable treatment after such aggressively toxic behaviour.

There is exactly one solution here with any integrity, and you know what it is. It is not too late to take it.

*Goober once banned me from GenDisc for making a frank but accurate summary of a well-known Latin poem in a discussion. HLP: where discussing Catullus gets cracked down harder than making baseless legal threats at other members.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 17, 2020, 07:21:35 pm
You have spent two weeks drawing up a convoluted seven point plan to solve something that isn’t a technical policy issue; it’s a personal issue, and that person is Goober. The admin team less Goober could do everything it needs to do without him and none of these drafted changes would be necessary because none of the other admins feel a desperate need to keep white nationalism from being defamed on this site. Goober’s actions have disqualified him from a leadership role, your response shows that other admins realise he is not worthy of leadership here, and yet you will bend over backwards to let him keep a badge.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 17, 2020, 07:25:48 pm
This is an insane degree of favouritism and the outcome of is exactly what I was concerned would happen. An *admin* whose previous actions have caused multiple users to leave the site and who threatened to sue several site members cannot reasonably expect to remain in that position, and yet here we are.

Absolutely none of these other other measures would be necessary if the one and only person to abuse their power was removed from their position.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 17, 2020, 07:47:02 pm
None of this effort was expended to retain Rian, to retain Scotty, to retain anyone who may have silently left the community because of Goober’s openly misogynistic, white nationalist views being aired all over the place and defended by endless rules lawyering.

If misogynistic, white nationalist views are being aired all over the place then that should absolutely be punished swiftly and harshly. The thing is though, as someone who doesn't enter the political discussion board I haven't really ever seen any, either on discord or in any of the FS2 modding related boards that I frequent.

Goober will be apologizing and will no longer be moderating any political discussions in the future. Whether an apology is enough for the act of making legal threats against other members of a 20 year old video game modding community over being called names in a political discussion, I can't say. Personally, I'd like to think that people can grow, change, and learn from their mistakes.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 17, 2020, 07:51:36 pm
They're perfectly capable of doing that without admin status. When leaders wantonly abuse their privileges the first lesson they need to learn is that this disqualifies them from leadership.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 17, 2020, 07:59:23 pm
That is true. I guess the question becomes whether Goober retaining admin powers is required for HLP functioning. I don't know whether HLP have been down forever or not after the HDD crash if he wasn't. What I do know is that I would never have managed to work on Inferno without him abusing his power to give me all power over the Inferno boards and usergroups and making a testing board and usergroup, something I'm not sure anyone else would have done or even been active enough to be able to do at the time. And just today he was the only admin who was both online and knew how to activate a newly registering user. So unfortunately, I think for now I'm going to have to say yes. All I can do is hope he never makes these mistakes again.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 17, 2020, 08:30:14 pm
I agree with Phantom Hoover, and he's said almost everything that I feel needs to be said, except for this, which I restate from the other thread:

As an administrator, Goober is one of the faces of HLP.  The status and title is an implicit endorsement of what he does and how he acts.  If his abuses of power and legal threats aren't enough to lose that status, what is? 

Is there any action he could plausibly take or any opinion he could have that would make the apparently only people whose opinions count decide that he isn't fit to be a member of the admin staff anymore?

The decision has been made, so whatever, but maybe this is a question you guys ought to be asking yourselves.  From where I'm standing, it really looks like that admin title makes you much less accountable.  Historically, Phantom Hoover got bans from Gendisc/PolDisc for a lot less.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 17, 2020, 08:40:15 pm
There has absolutely been a theme in this process of non-administrator, non-moderator users being treated as second class citizens. The people who were wronged by Goober, who were threatened with legal action and then censored by him against site policy, were told to shut up and sit tight while the people whose opinions mattered decided what to do behind closed doors, and we've now been handed down a verdict that we got no say in whatsoever which takes almost comical pains to avoid judgement or consequence for the person directly and solely responsible for this incident. When the little users act up we get told we're in violation of such and such a rule and slapped with a ban and a snarky comment. When an admin tramples all over basic rules of how this site is supposedly administered and slinging legal threats, the admins produce something that reads like an air crash investigation, assiduously avoiding actually blaming anyone in favour of neutral suggestions of systematic change.

It's not good enough.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 17, 2020, 08:44:38 pm
Goober's apologizing and will no longer be moderating any political discussions. That's not taking comical pains to not blame anyone and avoid consequences for him, even if you think it's not enough (which I do too, personally)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 17, 2020, 08:46:19 pm
As an administrator, Goober is one of the faces of HLP.  The status and title is an implicit endorsement of what he does and how he acts.  If his abuses of power and legal threats aren't enough to lose that status, what is? 

"Faces of HLP" - well that drama happened in a locked section so it's not relevant.

Quote
Historically, Phantom Hoover got bans from Gendisc/PolDisc for a lot less.

From what I recall PH was doing stuff over and over again, if you do that the level for the next ban is lower than if it's your first thing.

There has absolutely been a theme in this process of non-administrator, non-moderator users being treated as second class citizens.

Well there are more like 3 classes - Staff (obv), contributors and bystanders. If all you do yelling at other people in GD or PD the number of people who will care about is low. If a number of major contributors would threaten to quit over it, the decision might have went elseway.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 17, 2020, 08:51:53 pm
This is the **** I had to go through once to have a one week ban lifted after the week was up. (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=88227) And the ban was for pointing out that admins aren't allowed to ban people they're arguing with, funnily enough. I don't bring this up to get restitution for some six year old grudge, but because most of the leadership group is the same, the moderation culture is essentially the same, and the double standard is painfully, infuriatingly apparent. I was practically expected to beg for an unban after I was rude to an admin; Goober has violated the trust of his position about as badly as imaginable, mass censorship of criticism of his political views, and the reaction of the administrators is "say sorry and don't do it again".

It's not good enough.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nyctaeus on October 17, 2020, 09:58:37 pm
Against all of the manifestations of drama and hysteria around, I refuse to acknowledge that this situation is anything more then typical, political quarrel which happens all the time.

The infamous thread that's being discussed containted nothing, but pitiful accusations against Goob without anykind of hard evidence. Despite the fact, that he refused to acknowledge support for anykind of "white suprematism", more nonsense accusations emerged. The most concerning thing about it, is the fact that some memebers of moderation crew took part of this, despite the fact, that in such situations their responsibility is to remain impartial and objective.

Do you know what's cool about Axem? I have no bloody idea about his political beliefs. His moderation style is so subtle and impartial, that nobody is ever aggrieved. That's how moderation should work. Too bad that not everybody acknowledge this style of moderation.

Sorry guys, but somebody's support for this or another political option does not mean acceptance or support for everything that this particular political option proclaim. In my life I voted lots of options, from far-right to social-democrat. Sometimes you agree with part of postulates of one option, sometimes you just vote against somebody. I think it's rare kind of privilege to support a political option we completely agree with.

To be fair: I do not support anykind of far-right beliefs, being on the liberal side. I do not support any possible legal threats from Goob against any members of the community, but also I don't support anykind of unfounded accusations against Goob with little to no evidence supporting those accusations.

Goober is supportive admin and welcoming member of the community. I certainly do disagree with him regarding certain topics, but I also disagree with other admins and moderators. It doesn't mean that contradicting beliefs implicate anykind of hate towards anybody. Nothing Goober display renders him unappropiate for his function and none of his personal beliefs renders him violating anykind of law nor rules of the HLP.

There will always be people you disagree with. Exaggerating will not change a thing. I strongly suggest to both sides to reconsider their statements, and rethink if opposing political beliefs are more important, then obvious respect to other human being.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on October 17, 2020, 10:59:23 pm
Since you've taken the time to post something akin to a formal statement on a forum that has no recognition by any country as an organisation (and just to be clear, this is directed at Axem, which by extension means the HLP administration, not anyone else), let me offer my understanding on this whole issue.

The purpose of a moderator is to ensure that things do not get out of hand, and that everyone complies with a set of clear rules regarding how they should conduct themselves.

If you, as a moderator, attempt to intervene in a dispute that involves another moderator, with the intention to resolve it, but you find yourself getting bogged down in the contexts with which the dispute is placed, then you are no longer a moderator in this situation; you are unfit, as far as the current situation goes, to moderate. You should defer judgement to another moderator.

This entire forum thread is akin to a failure state on multiple fronts, ranging from the moderators who had attempted to intervene but ended up getting caught up in the discussion but still attempted to moderate anyway, to the regular members who are too thick-headed to swallow their pride or understand that understanding the viewpoints of others is not the same as having to accept them as the "truth", to members like myself, who have chosen not to get involved in anything but decide this is a good place as any to respond to problems that they are not a part of.

This sort of formal statement belongs to corporations, not communities. There has to be another solution.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Su-tehp on October 17, 2020, 11:46:07 pm
Sorry guys, but somebody's support for this or another political option does not mean acceptance or support for everything that this particular political option proclaim.
 

Supporting a white supremacist makes you a supporter of white supremacy.  I don't give a flying **** if someone supported Hitler because they liked his infrastructure policy, it still makes them a Nazi.

This. 1000x this. White supremacists, racists and misogynists are unworthy of any respect precisely because they refuse to grant women and people of color any right to equality or fairness simply because of who they are rather than anything those women and people of color did. That makes the values of white supremacists, racists and misogynists utterly inferior at best and outright evil at worst. That is why they deserve no respect and only deserve scorn and ridicule. The only proper response when a bully threatens you is to kick him in the nuts.

If someone feels threatened by the notion of equality, then that someone needs to check his privilege.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 17, 2020, 11:49:39 pm
Nyctaeus: I really must congratulate you for managing to miss the point so completely.

If this was just a case of political disagreement like any other, it wouldn't have become an issue any more than any other thread in that forum.  It didn't become an issue because of Goober's ****ty opinions, it became an issue because of how he reacted to being called out on those opinions.

Su-tehp:  Sorry, deleted my post because actually discussing the politics involved isn't the point of this thread.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 02:03:58 am
Against all of the manifestations of drama and hysteria around, I refuse to acknowledge that this situation is anything more then typical, political quarrel which happens all the time.

You could definitely argue if Trump (and by proxy, his supporters) followed white supremacist policies, that's something you'd discuss in a political discussion forum. That would be a common political quarrel. Just look at the US's southern border and the discussion of that.

At no time in HLP history has anyone, let alone an admin, threatened to take people to court over what they said in a discussion. This was Goober's first action in the thread. Everything else in that thread, and everything you see here in this thread, is the result of Goober taking extreme measures to escalate the situation.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 18, 2020, 02:52:24 am
I don't get the point behind calling Goober a "white supremacist" as I have never seen Goober post something racist; people in the US have been voting Trump for a number of reasons; black people voted him, latinos voted him and if they didn't his chances of ever becoming president would've been 0. It's surprising me that there are still people here haven't figrured that out by now.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 18, 2020, 03:21:20 am
None of this is about what Goober's views are or who he supports.

All of this is about Goober making legal threats against active HLP modders and contributors, then deleting the entire thread when called out on it. I have no doubt that if I threatened to sue everyone who left a negative review for Inferno and then deleted their threads, I would be removed from HLP.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 03:37:34 am
I don't get the point behind calling Goober a "white supremacist" as I have never seen Goober post something racist; people in the US have been voting Trump for a number of reasons; black people voted him, latinos voted him and if they didn't his chances of ever becoming president would've been 0. It's surprising me that there are still people here haven't figrured that out by now.

Gee that sure sounds like something you could discuss in a political discussion :P
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Rhymes on October 18, 2020, 05:15:39 am
Frankly, I find that this "solution" is wholly inadequate. What you're telling us, Axem, is that Goober will remain an admin, with all of the associated privileges on the forum, including the ability to moderate GenDisc and PolDisc. He's just not "allowed" to do it.

In other words, you're telling us that an admin who's already demonstrated a willingness to ignore the rules of the forum and the responsibilities of his role to get his way isn't going to do it again because . . . he's going to follow some new rules?

Why should we believe that? What guarantee do we have that he's not just going to ignore those too? Or that he's not going to break some other rules the next time someone says something mean about him? Hard to feel like this issue has been satisfactorily resolved when the offending individual is completely free to reoffend, and with no indications that his behavior is actually going to change (unless you expect us to believe that Goober has had a complete change of heart in the span of, what, a week?)

e: And no, my problem here is not that I find Goober's views repugnant (although I do), it's that he threatened a bull**** legal action against people who disagreed with him and then abused his admin powers to win the argument.

Also, as a side note, I believe other individuals that have threatened legal action against folks on HLP have eaten at least a temp ban. But then, they weren't admins, so apparently they don't count.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Assassin714 on October 18, 2020, 05:56:40 am
Could someone please explain to me what happened? What did he say and do that was so bad?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mito [PL] on October 18, 2020, 06:23:54 am
There was a political topic where he participated, got called a white supremacist and similar phrases multiple times, responded with a threat of legal action, and then some time later deleted the topic in its entirety.

The problem isn't anyone's political opinions - or people headbutting in political topics either. The problem is that Goober tossed threats of legal action against users because of being called names in some Internet forum (that supposedly would've been responded to with moderator action in the case of a normal user, but I do not know of any other such events taking place here), and that he directly used his admin powers to delete a functional topic without any discussion with other parts of the staff (and please correct me if I'm wrong).

The fact of a staff member moderating the discussion they've been recently actively participating in is also one place vulnerable for abuse, even if not intentional one, and I'm definitely happy that this has been mentioned and a solution to this exists, even if in a very basic form at the moment.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 07:01:24 am
To the HLP Community,

We understand recent events involving a locked and deleted thread and the actions of the staff have been frustrating and difficult for everyone.  We want to thank you for your patience while the administrators and global moderators resolved this issue.  Moderating staff have the obligation to act impartially in their duties and to bring in other staff when they cannot.  Clearly this rule was violated in the recently deleted thread in Political Discussions, and this has understandably led to hard feelings.  This is not a situation where platitudes are appropriate, and we are announcing the following measures and changes, effective immediately:

1.  All active staff have reaffirmed the commitment that they will not moderate disputes they are involved in, period.
2.  Staff, like all members of the community will be expected to use the Report Post function to handle disputes with other members or moderation of issues in which they are directly involved.  As we have a relatively small number of staff and - in Political Discussions in particular - we can often have many actively in a discussion, staff will be permitted to temporarily lock threads until other impartial moderators can respond to reports.  ALL staff have committed to the principle that their influence should be to de-escalate disputes.
3.  Future community moderation in General Discussion and Political Discussion will be undertaken by a minimum of two staff working together in agreement.  This may result in more temporary locks as cool-down periods on highly charged issues while staff can respond.  No single person will have final say or act unilaterally.
4.  Staff are developing a more comprehensive guidance on what constitutes a personal attack.  This can be subjective, and that can clearly lead to issues.  More information on this measure will follow.
5.  With regard to the deleted thread, selected posts from the thread relevant to the original topic and subsequent discussion will be restored and the thread will be reopened for discussion.  A group of three staff not otherwise involved as participants in the thread will determine which posts are to be restored.  Due to personal schedules of the three staff involved, this may take a few days.
6.  Goober5000 will be separately posting an apology to the community regarding his actions in particular.
7.  Goober5000 will no longer be engaged in moderation duties in General Discussion and Political Discussion until otherwise specified.

Also we all apologize for the amount of time this has taken to get resolved.  What happened was a very serious issue and it was only right to not rush it or be done by just a few people.  We reached out to as many other staff members as we could to get their input and insight, and unfortunately everyone isn't as active or around as they used to be.  Having a clear consensus from the staff was very important to get this resolved.

Thank you.
As always with anything the people with power around here say, I'll believe it when I see it. I mostly trust you, and 100% trust MP-Ryan, but the rest, to widely varying degrees, I don't trust. There are some I think will probably abide by the new rules but wouldn't bet on it, and others who will do their own thing as soon as it suits them, as they always have done for all the time I've been here, rendering everything that's ever been said here as empty words.

But at least this is more concrete than the usual stuff that comes out. And I approve, if it's implemented, particularly the end to unilateral moderation. I'm sure some people will abuse the locking threads part, but that's still an improvement.

About Goober, I approve. He was wrong, and so has been stripped of his power in the area he was wrong. Presumably there will be consequences if he breaches the conditions. There's no need to de-admin him, nothing ever happens outside the discussion forums, so unless I'm missing something, he's lost all the "sexy" power, and what he's left with is for putting in work, not having power over others. Afaik, he didn't drop the hammer on anyone, so I don't think we need to drop the hammer on him. Those who attacked him should be thankful they've gone unpunished.

I don't get the point behind calling Goober a "white supremacist" as I have never seen Goober post something racist; people in the US have been voting Trump for a number of reasons; black people voted him, latinos voted him and if they didn't his chances of ever becoming president would've been 0. It's surprising me that there are still people here haven't figrured that out by now.

Because it's Goober and they hate him. It's gaslighting, hitting him with the most uncharitable possible interpretation. It may even have been intentionally trying to bait him into using his power. People around here have been trying to get rid of him for years and years. If they can get him stripped to the ranks, then they can drive him out like the rest of the people they've driven out.

Could someone please explain to me what happened? What did he say and do that was so bad?

He got accused of being a white supremacist because he supports Trump by multiple people. He threatened legal action on those people if they didn't retract the statements, and when they didn't, he retracted them for them by deleting most of the thread. (I'm guessing he didn't actually delete it but split it away into the hidden mod / admin forums if we're going to get the thread back.) I don't necessarily think the legal action part was wrong, as in actionable here. He's not abusing his admin position doing that, anyone could do that.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 18, 2020, 07:06:52 am
The fundamental issue is that an *administrator* threatened legal action and abused his moderation powers. Goober has shown that he is unable to hold himself to the higher standards associated with his position and shouldn't be allowed to remain in it. Promising not to moderate a couple of forums has no weight behind it and can't be enforced. Goober has already shown he has no issue with breaking rules, why would he obey new ones that apply to only him?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MatthTheGeek on October 18, 2020, 07:07:14 am
I think the important part here is, Goober is a grown up, he's been here for a long time, and therefore he should know as well as everyone here that power carries responsibility and that actions have consequences.

When you have "Administrator" written next to each of your post, what you say carries a weight and influence, and affects the image of the community in a way that any random user does not, and therefore what you may say and the actions you take have to be held to a higher standard.

If you cannot meet that standard, then you should relinquish the responsibilities that come with it. Especially when, in this case, it's been a long time pattern and not just a first strike.

Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 07:24:20 am
The fundamental issue is that an *administrator* threatened legal action and abused his moderation powers. Goober has shown that he is unable to hold himself to the higher standards associated with his position and shouldn't be allowed to remain in it.
You're right in principle. The problem is the people in power here have always been able to do what they want with impunity. Goober's is just the latest, and pretty tame in comparison to what others have done in the past, and with mitigating circumstances. By itself, it's not enough to warrant taking his admin away imo. To be morally correct in getting Goober out of the staff, then all others who have abused their position would have to go too.

We could really use some robust controls going forward to curb staff power abuse. But they never police themselves, even for the most egregious violations. They don't even follow their own rules.

Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: TopAce on October 18, 2020, 07:42:55 am
Since I've been asbsent from the community apart from FotG and missed it all, I have only one question: Where is he? I see a lot of perspectives here, except for Goober's.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 07:46:09 am
Quote
He got accused of being a white supremacist because he supports Trump by multiple people.

Just a nuance, Goober being accused of being a white supremacist directly only happened after he claimed Mixael's statement was defamation and subject to legal action (the rest of the forum having a "I'm spartacus" moment). Ofc. nuances like this wouldn't need to be explained if the posts involved hadn't been deleted.

Quote
It's gaslighting, hitting him with the most uncharitable possible interpretation.

That's not what those words mean, let's not go full into accusing people of mental abuse.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Fineus on October 18, 2020, 07:52:59 am
Where is he? I see a lot of perspectives here, except for Goober's.

We've asked Goober to get a statement of apology together (but since none of us live on here including him, that's taking a little time to get together).

In the meantime while I understand the frustrations posted above, we're doing what feels like the best thing to do in the situation. I've been made aware of the details previously and since it's clear Goober's activity in certain subs has caused friction, the most sensible move is to curtail that specific activity.

I'm something of a believer in second chances (I appreciate some are not) but would hope this moment will prove a wake up call and an end to these issues. (If) further issues arise then we'll have this moment to look back upon - this is "that chance".

In reference to political discussions on this sub... I've felt before that HLP had no place for real world politics but have had it pointed out to me that it can be cathartic and topical to be able to discuss them. For that reason I am not tabling a reduction of political chat / places to chat. HOWEVER I do hope what goes on in those subs can be held separately to this communities primary reason for being here: HLP / FreeSpace / gaming itself.

This is a gaming community first and foremost. Always has been.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 18, 2020, 07:53:25 am
You're right in principle. The problem is the people in power here have always been able to do what they want with impunity. Goober's is just the latest, and pretty tame in comparison to what others have done in the past, and with mitigating circumstances. By itself, it's not enough to warrant taking his admin away imo. To be morally correct in getting Goober out of the staff, then all others who have abused their position would have to go too.
Oh I'm all for it, who is it and what did they do that's worse than threatening legal action and then unilaterally deleting a thread when people didn't back down?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 08:03:30 am
You're right in principle. The problem is the people in power here have always been able to do what they want with impunity. Goober's is just the latest, and pretty tame in comparison to what others have done in the past, and with mitigating circumstances. By itself, it's not enough to warrant taking his admin away imo. To be morally correct in getting Goober out of the staff, then all others who have abused their position would have to go too.
Oh I'm all for it, who is it and what did they do that's worse than threatening legal action and then unilaterally deleting a thread when people didn't back down?

Big can of worms, makes my head hurt just thinking about unpacking it. But me unloading on like half the staff with absolutely no reason to believe anything will happen to them while something may very well happen to me instead is not something I wish to do at this time.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 08:20:17 am
This is your chance though, whilst people who are otherwise detached from the website and are capable of judging things neutrally are here.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 08:59:36 am
This is your chance though, whilst people who are otherwise detached from the website and are capable of judging things neutrally are here.
Hmmm... alright. But I'm not going to go crazy. I'll throw a stone into the stagnant waters and see what happens.

How about casual confidentiality breaches?

(https://i.ibb.co/N1skKyt/Confidentiality-Breach.jpg)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 18, 2020, 09:12:49 am
I have no idea what would make you think reports are confidential.  I also still have no idea why you'd think this post (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=87957.msg1755608#msg1755608) was worthy of a report.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 09:25:45 am
I have no idea what would make you think reports are confidential.  I also still have no idea why you'd think this post (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=87957.msg1755608#msg1755608) was worthy of a report.
Here comes the defence from the clique!

They are, and you know it, and I'm sure most people know it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 18, 2020, 09:29:19 am
You know, fun thing about that snippet that you kept around for 6 years.

After you sent that to Black Wolf, we had an internal discussion about that. The consensus that emerged then was that yes, I was wrong to share that, and I agreed not to do it again ... but also, that there was never a formal rule in place that said that moderation reports were confidential.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 18, 2020, 09:32:35 am
I don't see how these things from 6 years ago apply to the current discussion.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 09:34:34 am
You know, fun thing about that snippet that you kept around for 6 years.

After you sent that to Black Wolf, we had an internal discussion about that. The consensus that emerged then was that yes, I was wrong to share that, and I agreed not to do it again ... but also, that there was never a formal rule in place that said that moderation reports were confidential.
That is a very poor excuse. I'm sure you don't have formal rules for a lot of things, because they go without saying. Or they should!
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 09:36:05 am
I don't see how these things from 6 years ago apply to the current discussion.
Read back to see how we got here.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Fineus on October 18, 2020, 09:39:17 am
I'm inclined to agree with Nightmare on this one Lorric, I don't see how this is useful with reference to the issue at hand.

That goes for everyone else too. If someone has done something you feel worth raising now then please do so in a separate thread.

This topic could do with resolving without the thread devolving into cross-purposes.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 18, 2020, 09:40:17 am
I don't see how these things from 6 years ago apply to the current discussion.

Lorric wants to pretend that his report being mocked on IRC is the equivalent of threatening legal action and deleting a thread because of wounded pride.

Here comes the defence from the clique!

The clique being who?  The people who don't particularly like you?  Yeah, truly quite a power bloc.

No one cares about the axe you have to grind re: The_E.  No one cared then and no one cares 6 years later.  Maybe take that as a signal to let it go.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 09:47:16 am
I'm inclined to agree with Nightmare on this one Lorric, I don't see how this is useful with reference to the issue at hand.

That goes for everyone else too. If someone has done something you feel worth raising now then please do so in a separate thread.

This topic could do with resolving without the thread devolving into cross-purposes.
Well, it goes back to the topic of people wanting Goober stripped to the ranks. I don't even necessarily want to go through the staff with a chainsaw, but if we booted Goober now it would be because it was Goober, not that what he did was so bad. I'm happy enough with things as they are. We have Axem and MP-Ryan now and maybe, just maybe, things might change a bit when people abuse their positions.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MatthTheGeek on October 18, 2020, 09:48:29 am
I'm something of a believer in second chances (I appreciate some are not) but would hope this moment will prove a wake up call and an end to these issues. (If) further issues arise then we'll have this moment to look back upon - this is "that chance".
Again, goober's been here longer than most of us and his behavior is nothing new, there's only so many seconds chances one should be given.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Fineus on October 18, 2020, 09:57:51 am
Well, it goes back to the topic of people wanting Goober stripped to the ranks. I don't even necessarily want to go through the staff with a chainsaw, but if we booted Goober now it would be because it was Goober, not that what he did was so bad. I'm happy enough with things as they are. We have Axem and MP-Ryan now and maybe, just maybe, things might change a bit when people abuse their positions.

Fair enough! In that case I'd agree I'm keen not to go through the staff with a chainsaw (or indeed anyone).

Quote
Again, goober's been here longer than most of us and his behavior is nothing new, there's only so many seconds chances one should be given.

On the one hand, I'd say being around somewhere longer does mean you have greater scope to get it wrong but also maybe (just maybe) earn a couple more second chances than someone brand new. I would say that Goober has significantly contributed to this community - more so than some drama on a political sub-board should undo. Perhaps that makes me appear weak but whatever. Ironically this is NOT a court of law / legal system and it's silly to play as such. We're a bunch of fans of gaming and modding and so-forth and should approach this as such.

*However* I also concur with the general consensus that threatening legal action etc. was an unacceptable move. It's for that reason that the above steps are being taken.

I won't claim to speak for everyone - be it the community, the admins, the mods or anyone else. But I will say that while I would like for nothing further to come of this, IF there are further problems I am very much a witness to what happened here and that this is a 'last' second chance.

Conversely I don't want witch hunts going forward to try and poke or provoke *anyone* into a reaction or into saying something stupid.

Mistakes have been made, action taken (with the understanding that the chance given is a last second chance). Personally I'd be glad that that be the end of it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 10:02:53 am
Btw Fineus, I forgot about you as it's so rare to see you when I was thinking about staff. I've never had any issue with you. You even moderated me once, and I thought it was fair. It's nice to see you here, the fact someone got you involved and you are involved in itself is one sign that this has been taken more seriously than is normal.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Fineus on October 18, 2020, 10:05:45 am
It's nice to see you here, the fact someone got you involved and you are involved in itself is one sign that this has been taken more seriously than is normal.

Nice to see you (and everyone else) also!

I'm painfully aware that I'm not around much these days and it's fantastic to see everyone still cracking on - not to be sentimental but it IS great.

In a way that's why I'm so loathe to see 'big' steps taken if a little step might do at this point. I hope that it does!

(And yes, while I won't claim to have spent a 10th of the energy the other active admins and mods have here in recent years, I do hope my speaking up shows it's not something that's escaping attention at all levels. I really do hope it can be resolved amicably and that's the approach I think we all want to try first).
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 18, 2020, 10:28:00 am
As a minor entity on the moderator scene,..... Hi!
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 18, 2020, 10:41:47 am
Frankly, I find that this "solution" is wholly inadequate. What you're telling us, Axem, is that Goober will remain an admin, with all of the associated privileges on the forum, including the ability to moderate GenDisc and PolDisc. He's just not "allowed" to do it.

In other words, you're telling us that an admin who's already demonstrated a willingness to ignore the rules of the forum and the responsibilities of his role to get his way isn't going to do it again because . . . he's going to follow some new rules?

Why should we believe that? What guarantee do we have that he's not just going to ignore those too? Or that he's not going to break some other rules the next time someone says something mean about him? Hard to feel like this issue has been satisfactorily resolved when the offending individual is completely free to reoffend, and with no indications that his behavior is actually going to change (unless you expect us to believe that Goober has had a complete change of heart in the span of, what, a week?)

e: And no, my problem here is not that I find Goober's views repugnant (although I do), it's that he threatened a bull**** legal action against people who disagreed with him and then abused his admin powers to win the argument.

Also, as a side note, I believe other individuals that have threatened legal action against folks on HLP have eaten at least a temp ban. But then, they weren't admins, so apparently they don't count.

I've largely refrained from commenting so far because everyone has a right to express their opinions on this particular staff decision, but I do want to take this opportunity to clear things up.

This was a long and contentious discussion and it was not arrived at lightly.  HLP's systems do not easily allow for us to distinguish between "technical side" administration and moderation abilities.  Goober has provided substantial technical-side support and work that does not go unrecognized.  However, all the staff recognized that this situation is intolerable which is why we have collectively compromised on tangible, real measures.  Goober will not be moderating GenDisc and PolDisc from this point onward until there is clear communication otherwise.  There are substantial changes to the way moderation in those areas will be conducted.

There are extremely few actual user bans in HLP's history - and to make this clear, I would not support the immediate banning of any user for vague legal threats as a first course of action.

As to what is to prevent Goober from violating his agreement again, he has given his word that he will abide by these conditions.  As a result, this compromise reflects the combined opinions of the entire staff who participated in the discussion (which was heated and passionate, and the simple reason that it was not public is because we didn't need to burn down the entire forum with that kind of discussion).  As someone who deals with contentious and serious legal matters in their career, my view fits the cliche:  the fairest kind of compromise in a serious matter is one that no one is happy with.  This agreement strikes that balance.  Should the agreement be violated, then there will be direct, serious, and [relatively] immediate consequences.  That's my word on the matter.

If anyone doesn't trust the motives of any individual person who contributed to this decision, we ask at least that you trust that all of us have tried to strike a balance that is best for the community itself going forward - and if it turns out that approach was incorrect, then we'll all revisit these decisions again.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 18, 2020, 11:01:25 am
Skipping all the Lorric thread hijacking....

2 points of clarification.

First... I accused Goober of being a white supremacist supporter. I remember, because I wanted to say other things, but chose not to. Others may have taken the next step, but I can't reference the thread to check. It was my accusation that originally got the legal threat.

Second... It was bad that he deleted the thread, but let's not forget that was after another mod had locked the thread temporarily while he waited for a mod not active in the thread to moderate it. Appropriate moderation had already occurred. Goober didn't approve and took matters into his own hands.

This solution is... Pretty much what I expected. I made my position on all this pretty clear to Goober in private more than a week ago. Unfortunately for him, I'm still an asshole. I wish I could be as kind and graceful as people I highly respect like Axem and Galemp, but I'm not.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Galemp on October 18, 2020, 11:42:47 am
Mike, being intolerant of intolerance doesn't make you an asshole. Were that we were all so brave.

As others have said, being kind and gracious with those that hold hateful ideals, is a privilege, and one I'm taking advantage of in my approach to all this. That doesn't make me the better man.

That said: again, what we are dealing with here is abuse of power by an admin threatening legal action against members. I think "don't do it again" is an inadequate response and and that at least a temp ban would be more appropriate, as admins should be held to a higher standard and the punishment needs to reflect that. No member would be afforded that same opportunity.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 18, 2020, 12:03:22 pm
I'm going to point out that with the exception of someone whose posts I never even saw called Motley-Jester, the last temp ban we gave a user was in 2016.

Bans on HLP are pretty rare these days. We do try to treat them as a last resort a lot more than we used to.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 12:16:04 pm
I for one am interested to see what he says in this apology. We should at least see that before thinking about banning him.

The emphasis on the legal action threat puzzles me. Sure, I know some people just want to get rid of Goober, but I don't think everyone who has brought it up does. It was obviously an empty threat, and they knew it, which is why they all gleefully jumped in, I'm Spartacus style.

But let's not act like he's the only one at fault, whenever he opens his mouth about anything in that part of the forum, someone, often more than one person, beats him over the head with the doomsday thing, and this was no exception. I think he's got the message. It was over three years ago! And with the supremacist thing, he was seriously provoked, though shouldn't have fallen into the trap, but they've been poking the proverbial bear for a long, long time now trying to get this to happen.

So for me it seems best the way things are, no bans for anyone, Goober loses his authority in Gen and Pol disc.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 18, 2020, 12:33:33 pm
First... I accused Goober of being a white supremacist supporter. I remember, because I wanted to say other things, but chose not to. Others may have taken the next step, but I can't reference the thread to check. It was my accusation that originally got the legal threat.

There is no reason whatsoever for that thread to remain deleted long after every other admin has acknowledged that its deletion was totally illegitimate.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 18, 2020, 01:02:47 pm
But let's not act like he's the only one at fault, whenever he opens his mouth about anything in that part of the forum, someone, often more than one person, beats him over the head with the doomsday thing, and this was no exception. I think he's got the message. It was over three years ago! And with the supremacist thing, he was seriously provoked, though shouldn't have fallen into the trap, but they've been poking the proverbial bear for a long, long time now trying to get this to happen.

If someone doesn't like being called out for their ****ty political opinions, they should shut the **** up about politics.  No one forced him to start spewing his garbage, and no one owes him a safe space in which to do so.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Droid803 on October 18, 2020, 01:59:16 pm
imagine getting your panties in a knot over politics on an internet forum lmao
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 18, 2020, 02:12:38 pm
The deletion of the thread is being reversed (in part), and absolutely no one is proposing that opinions, ****ty or otherwise, be protected from criticism.  Axem's last statement on that subject stands: https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=96974.msg1902484#msg1902484

In the meantime, while you're all welcome to complain about the selected path forward, it would be greatly appreciated if everyone could move their hand holding the matches away from the hand holding the gasoline can.  Go ahead and be mad, but there is no need to try to start a bigger fight (and I am not looking at anyone in particular, just a general comment).
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: spart_n on October 18, 2020, 02:18:39 pm
this thread is very wholesome 0 big chungus non-approved, made-keanu-reaves-quit-his-acting-career reddit moment, tbh.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 18, 2020, 02:45:11 pm
Regardless of what happened, and what the solution may be, hopefully a foundation is laid for things like this not to happen again.

It is good to see Axem and the rest of the admins take these kinds of things seriously, comment on them publicly, and try to meaningfully improve things, even though the decisions may not be appealing or compelling to everyone.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 02:52:59 pm
Why not just restore the thread in full? I don't particularely care for the thread itself, but why this careful review and selection process when the reason for deleting the thread itself (namely, that it broke the law) was entirely illegitimate.

If the admin consensus is that Goober made a colossal mistake, choosing to either fully revert the mistake or letting the mistake stand would make sense. Reverting it partially makes no sense.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 03:17:50 pm
Why not just restore the thread in full? I don't particularely care for the thread itself, but why this careful review and selection process when the reason for deleting the thread itself (namely, that it broke the law) was entirely illegitimate.

If the admin consensus is that Goober made a colossal mistake, choosing to either fully revert the mistake or letting the mistake stand would make sense. Reverting it partially makes no sense.
Because Goober wasn't the only one who was wrong. Otherwise it would be done.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 03:38:34 pm
To quote a man who has worked with Goober for many years:

what we are dealing with here is abuse of power by an admin threatening legal action against members.

I realize poldisc isn't sunshine and rainbows, but I can't really equate any of the other members' actions with what Goober has done.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 18, 2020, 03:50:43 pm
Because Goober wasn't the only one who was wrong. Otherwise it would be done.

Goober is the only one who threatened legal action and abused his power by deleting a thread.  Notice how all the times he didn't do that, it never became a ****storm like this?  Yeah, that's because this time, Goober crossed a line, and he is the only one who crossed it.

So yeah, in this specific context, he's the only one who was wrong.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 03:52:05 pm
To quote a man who has worked with Goober for many years:

what we are dealing with here is abuse of power by an admin threatening legal action against members.

I realize poldisc isn't sunshine and rainbows, but I can't really equate any of the other members' actions with what Goober has done.
I do not see how the legal action thing is an abuse of admin power, anyone could threaten anyone with legal action. Don't have to be an admin.

Only the fact he wiped the thread bothers me. The legal action thing was so obviously an empty threat, he might as well have threatened to step through their screens and kick their asses!

Even if Goober is worse, that doesn't magically absolve the others.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 03:57:20 pm
I do not see how the legal action thing is an abuse of admin power, anyone could threaten anyone with legal action. Don't have to be an admin.

But Goober did it as part of a moderation command.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 18, 2020, 03:58:01 pm
Petition to move this thread to PolDisc (and the other one too). It started there, it should be ended there; it literally carries it in title; enough of the public drama.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 03:59:34 pm
I do not see how the legal action thing is an abuse of admin power, anyone could threaten anyone with legal action. Don't have to be an admin.

But Goober did it as part of a moderation command.
I never saw it that way. And he may have deleted the thread, but he never banned anyone.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 04:02:50 pm
Lorric I have to ask, have you actually seen the thread we're talking about here? I had expected you to post in PolDisc at some point in the past few years, since it's something you comment on often in your posts.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 04:06:12 pm
Lorric I have to ask, have you actually seen the thread we're talking about here? I had expected you to post in PolDisc at some point in the past few years, since it's something you comment on often in your posts.
Of course I've seen it. I even saw the moment Goober deleted most of it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 18, 2020, 04:14:13 pm
Petition to move this thread to PolDisc (and the other one too). It started there, it should be ended there; it literally carries it in title; enough of the public drama.

Goober getting his administratorship curtailed is still something that affects the wider forum. I hear you though, so I'll just stop posting in this thread.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mongoose on October 18, 2020, 04:16:24 pm
Petition to move this thread to PolDisc (and the other one too). It started there, it should be ended there; it literally carries it in title; enough of the public drama.

This is a site-wide issue, not just one confined to a specific subforum.

And a firm reminder to everyone to stay on-topic.  Heated disagreements are fine as long they don't get personal, but if you have an unrelated issue, kindly address it elsewhere.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 18, 2020, 04:42:16 pm
Even if Goober is worse, that doesn't magically absolve the others.

Absolve the others of what?  Disagreeing with Goober?

And yeah, if Goober had threatened bodily harm to anyone here, even as a clearly empty threat, I'd definitely consider that something that would make him unworthy of being part of the site's admin staff.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 05:02:59 pm
Even if Goober is worse, that doesn't magically absolve the others.

Absolve the others of what?  Disagreeing with Goober?

And yeah, if Goober had threatened bodily harm to anyone here, even as a clearly empty threat, I'd definitely consider that something that would make him unworthy of being part of the site's admin staff.
White supremacist, remember? Personal attack.

Let's be real though, it's not about behaviour with you people, you'd be cheering him on if that was a pro-Trump thread he wiped out.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 18, 2020, 05:14:09 pm
White supremecist supporter.

Lorric, it really seems like you have some generic axe to grind and decided this thread was the one to do it in. What's your game here? To just argue with everyone?

And for the record, I would not be for deleting a pro-trump thread (assuming a thing could even exist on a forum full of generally caring and empathetic individuals). I would post in there the same way I post in any Trump thread. I'm comfortable where my position lies and how history will look upon it... that's why I wouldn't delete any threads lol.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 18, 2020, 05:25:09 pm
White supremacist, remember? Personal attack.
  No, we said he supported white supremacists.  Because he supports Trump, who is a white supremacist.

And no, like Mjn, I wouldn't be for deleting a pro-Trump thread, for pretty much the same reason.

It really just seems like you're desperately trying to make excuses for Goober because The_E stood opposite him and you hold a grudge against The_E because of bull**** that happened half a decade ago.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mongoose on October 18, 2020, 05:35:00 pm
Lorric, consider this your final warning.  If you continue to air personal grievances in this thread, you will swiftly lose your ability to post in it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 18, 2020, 05:43:26 pm
Sorry you two. Looks like I can't continue this.

I'll just say it's not about E, or anyone else, at no point have I said anyone but Goober should be punished. I am happy with the decision made in the OP.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 18, 2020, 05:55:34 pm
If you are all so confident that there is nothing to stop Goober from moderating political discussion and that he will do so again, what do you think will happen when he so inevitably does?

I do think the honorable thing to do in this situation would be to resign, but let's also not pretend that removing Goober as admin wouldn't harm FS modding or magically make FS modding great again. Again, Inferno would not have released if he didn't grant me access and a testing board instead of me having to petition a ~high council of modding~ with a mission statement backed up by 3 honored members or whatever the actual process would have been. Removing Goober won't bring Battuta back, if what Aesaar posted in the last thread is to be believed - he left FS modding because of disagreements in what he was allowed to post in political discussion, not anything related to FS modding. I firmly believe that if someone leaves a modding community for a 20 year old video game over disagreements on political discussion that has absolutely nothing to do with modding a 20 year old video game, that's a problem with the person leaving.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Assassin714 on October 18, 2020, 06:36:12 pm
What did he actually say that provoked all of this? The way people are talking about it, it sounds like he openly admitted to be a member of the KKK or something.

Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mongoose on October 18, 2020, 06:56:32 pm
I do think the honorable thing to do in this situation would be to resign, but let's also not pretend that removing Goober as admin wouldn't harm FS modding or magically make FS modding great again. Again, Inferno would not have released if he didn't grant me access and a testing board instead of me having to petition a ~high council of modding~ with a mission statement backed up by 3 honored members or whatever the actual process would have been. Removing Goober won't bring Battuta back, if what Aesaar posted in the last thread is to be believed - he left FS modding because of disagreements in what he was allowed to post in political discussion, not anything related to FS modding. I firmly believe that if someone leaves a modding community for a 20 year old video game over disagreements on political discussion that has absolutely nothing to do with modding a 20 year old video game, that's a problem with the person leaving.

I can't speak for how things went with your situation, but in general, I don't want anyone to feel like they have to jump through a dozen hoops and prostrate themselves in order to get something resolved.  If there's something that needs doing, then by all means, just ask an active staff member about it.  Either they'll handle things themselves, or pass it along to someone who can.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Goober5000 on October 19, 2020, 08:53:13 pm
My official response:

There are quite a lot of people with passionate opinions here.  I'm one of them.  As such, I found a false accusation of white supremacy to be extremely offensive.  For the record, I am not a white supremacist, and I disavow white supremacy.

And to clarify, I do not intend to bring legal action against anyone.  A description that something "is grounds for legal action" is not the same as a threat to actually take that action.

I do agree that the splitting and removing the thread was a violation of the principle of not moderating a dispute in which you are a party.  For that I apologize.  As I said in the internal board, I made two mistakes here: I misinterpreted an invitation to make a post as an invitation to take moderator action, and I did not double check before going ahead and doing it.

As MP-Ryan said, I have given my word that I will abide by the agreement we all reached.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 20, 2020, 12:33:26 am
Isn't it entirely possible to restrict moderation authority on GD and poldisc by unticking boxes, removing the doubt from people's minds that any potential to repeat exists?  It makes the agreement impossible to breach.

I'm being impartial and practical here.


Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 20, 2020, 12:48:37 am
If that option existed, yes. It doesn't.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 20, 2020, 01:37:29 am
And to clarify, I do not intend to bring legal action against anyone.  A description that something "is grounds for legal action" is not the same as a threat to actually take that action.

Then why bring it up in the first place? The first response you had to a post you found offensive was to demand it be removed with the stated reason that it was "grounds for legal action". Who was going to bring legal action against the website except you? Do you realize why everyone else in that thread, several people of whom were HLP staff, interpreted it as a threat? What I'm noticing from your apology is that you do apologize for what happened after MP-Ryan prudently locked the thread, but not for your actions that lead to the escalation of that thread in the first place.

I'm extremely concerned that as a justification for your actions you pointed towards the moderation policies of Gab (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network)), a website known for its far-right userbase. I hope you do realize the irony that after you got mad because someone pointed out that you support far-right views, you would then unilaterally employ moderation policies based on the actions of a company that itself holds far right views (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/30/tech/gab-anti-semitic-speech-invs).

I implore you to read the posts of Galemp and Mjn.Mixael, people who have worked with you in the past, in this thread and PH's thread.

Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 20, 2020, 03:11:51 am
If that option existed, yes. It doesn't.

That's fair, but if someone, using myself as an example is only able to moderate GD, can you not invert the process used to restrict my moderation to allow someone else to moderate everywhere but, GD and poldisc?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 20, 2020, 03:20:06 am
I, personally and speaking outside my role as moderator, don't think that this apology suffices. Why? Because this is, verbatim, what you posted in response to mjn:

This is defamation and libel, which is grounds for legal action.  Retract it.

You had several options in responding to mjn's post. One would be to ignore it as a piece of hyperbole. Another would be to report it to let other moderators take a look. Yet another would be, regardless of how improper it would have been for you to do so, to point to the forum rules and say that this strays close to questionable conduct. Had you taken any of these options, this matter would not have blown up as much as it did.
You chose to a) proclaim mjn's statement to be defamation and libel, b) mention that this is grounds for legal action and c) command mjn to retract that statement.
This is, clearly and very unambiguously, a threat. It is not a simple statement of legal fact (not that it actually is a legal fact, let's be clear on that); Your claim that you didn't intend to bring legal action is immaterial in the face of you very clearly trying (and failing) to use the threat of legal action as a tool to intimidate people into removing statements you did not like.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 20, 2020, 03:20:54 am
If that option existed, yes. It doesn't.

That's fair, but if someone, using myself as an example is only able to moderate GD, can you not invert the process used to restrict my moderation to allow someone else to moderate everywhere but, GD and poldisc?

The problem is that you apparently can't create a new role that is "administrator but without these specific powers".
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 20, 2020, 03:23:33 am
What I'm noticing from your apology is that you do apologize for what happened after MP-Ryan prudently locked the thread, but not for your actions that lead to the escalation of that thread in the first place.

This is how my arguments with Goober have gone every single time over the years we've worked together. I'm honestly kinda done because this "official response" is exactly what I expected. It's whatever. If this is how Goober wants to burn relational bridges, that's his choice.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 20, 2020, 04:06:38 am
Nothing in the "compromise" prevents Goober from threatening legal action again, and it's clear from his rules lawyering apology that he thinks the legal threat was fine. I wish the site leadership would stop trying to persue "Reasonableness" with someone who quite frankly can't be reasoned with.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 20, 2020, 04:10:45 am
Goober's apology is of course totally inadequate and admits fault only in the most tiny, narrow technical sense before immediately following up with a bunch of justification about how he "misinterpreted" other people and just made an innocent mistake. It's more or less what I expected, but the question for the other admins, Axem and MP-Ryan and others, is whether they ever had any standard for the 'apology' he would need to make to keep his powers to begin with. He clearly has no real idea what he's done wrong. Multiple people, including the person he most directly wronged, have rejected this apology. You can take that seriously and try to mend it or you can continue to tell us that it would be unfair to actually hold Goober responsible for his actions. Please, I am sincerely asking you: do the right thing here. Actually listen to the people who, as non-administrators, are subject to Goober throwing his weight around, the people who you gave no say at all in this compromise, and revise it.

Goober is unworthy of leadership in this community and it is an insult to every member of his site to let him keep a position of power and privilege over them.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 20, 2020, 04:22:00 am
If that option existed, yes. It doesn't.

That's fair, but if someone, using myself as an example is only able to moderate GD, can you not invert the process used to restrict my moderation to allow someone else to moderate everywhere but, GD and poldisc?

The problem is that you apparently can't create a new role that is "administrator but without these specific powers".


That's fair, thanks for the clarification, I do often forget the distinction between mod and admin due to being on the mod side of the fence.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 20, 2020, 04:30:48 am
I still believe that pushing for the removal of an admin for GD/PD issues is the equivalent of getting an entire building demolished because someone doesn't like the color of its walls. Said walls can be repainted instead, and/or nobody is forced to look at them 24/7.

And I'm not saying the actions carried out can be justified or anything. Mistakes have been made. The point is that there's still a demand for resolutions which far outweigh the core of the issue that triggered them, especially in a productive community like HLP where a significant chunk of forum activity is still tied to keeping a 20 years old game alive. Many members are asking for something that, once applied, would somehow damage that productivity, and that'd be a bad move IMO.


We now have enforced moderation rules, an apology, and a well coordinated effort to prevent things like this from happening again. I don't see why people should still support a strict you-most-push-the-big-red-button policy on the matter.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: 0rph3u5 on October 20, 2020, 07:31:53 am
I found the ruling wanting...

Even the explanation from The_E that comes to down to an inadequacy of the platform does little to reconcile what I would have considered the desired outcome and the actual outcome (while it not an uncommon occurrence to find technical systems such as forum's software infrastructure lacking, it is hardly a desirable state - the discussion about which of the triplets Ignorance, Naivety or Negligence is most responsible is a horse we can all beat but only a few can lead to water).

... but I could have settled - certainly not comfortably but then again, I stopped expecting things make me comfortable way back.


But when what was billed as an apology arrived, it removed any basis for settling the matter – even in, admittedly relative, discomfort.

I admit that I don’t know Goober well enough to resolve the issue if this is the result of habit or calculation – him by circumstance being my point of contact when it comes to matters with the FSPort and often the first person I have contact with in my dealings with the SCP isn’t exactly a much of relationship.

While that question of intention may remain unresolved for me, the result is undeniable: What appeared is only effective at drying out the conversation. I didn’t except a fountain of empathy or understanding, but at least an acknowledgement of matters beyond the facts of the case. Retrospection surely could not have been this fruitless.

It fails to restore any degree of trust as is. Furthermore, the resolution of the question of intention into either direction is not to do such either – more so, if what has been presented proves to have been the result of calculation, it is disqualifying for position of public trust as it displays the desire to be unaccountable and poor judgement in the face of a demand for accountability.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlueFlames on October 20, 2020, 09:16:59 am
I'm still waiting for Goob to post an apology.  All I've seen from him in this thread so far are justifications and reinterpretations of posts in a thread that--haha!--remains inaccessible.  I rather thought Goob would pull this nonapology crap, but I figured I'd give him his chance before weighing in.

Goob escalated an argument and flagrantly abused his admin privileges to win that argument and cover his tracks.  That should be sufficient grounds for removing his admin status.  Given a second chance by way of this seven-point deal, he's already proven unable or unwilling to abide by those rules.

Aren't forum mods and admins supposed to hold themselves to a higher standard of accountability than the general userbase?  That's certainly not what I see Goob doing right now.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 20, 2020, 10:05:48 am
My self ban to avoid arguing with Goober over the need to close churches in the middle of a pandemic expired guys! I'm back what's going on!!
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 20, 2020, 10:06:06 am
Oh
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: EatThePath on October 20, 2020, 10:58:18 am
My two cents: Ignoring the fact that normal users can't do everything he did, I expect that if it was a random schmo at the center of this instead they would have at minimum had a long ban from PD/GD, and possibly just been banned outright. I understand the tension that comes from wanting to keep core contributors to the community, but that level of double standard is distressing to me.

Beyond that, The E's response to the apology says most of what I would want to better than I would. This whole episode won't make me swear off FSO out of hand, but it's certainly discouraging and disappointing.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 20, 2020, 12:23:18 pm
Nothing in the "compromise" prevents Goober from threatening legal action again, and it's clear from his rules lawyering apology that he thinks the legal threat was fine. I wish the site leadership would stop trying to persue "Reasonableness" with someone who quite frankly can't be reasoned with.

Speaking personally, I have made it abundantly clear that the [vague] legal threat was not acceptable and the staff have made it clear that none of what occurred in this incident will be tolerated again.  There are changes in effect and they do, in fact, mean something.

In terms of the apology, while the staff did provide feedback on the first rough draft, the choice of what to write to sufficiently apologize was left to Goober, and people are free to continue to provide their [constructive, meaningful] thoughts on it - and he can address those thoughts if he so chooses.  This has never been an exercise in the staff "covering" for Goober, and to be perfectly frank (again speaking personally) I'm more than an little insulted by that supposition.  We collectively arrived at a compromise.  We don't like the situation or the compromise, but this was the best available path forward under the current circumstances.  Goober will obviously have to earn any goodwill or forgiveness he expects to receive, and absolutely none of us are saying any of what transpired was okay and that we support his behaviour.  This will not happen again.

As to the assertion that any other user who posted a vague legal threat would have been banned, it is flatly incorrect.  As a general rule, we do not ban users immediately for bad behaviour and have not for years.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: DefCynodont119 on October 20, 2020, 12:33:33 pm
My self ban to avoid arguing with Goober over the need to close churches in the middle of a pandemic expired guys! I'm back what's going on!!

Oh


I was moving at the time of the original thread's events (I was the thread's OP) and if I had not have been lurking via my flip-phone I would have missed this entire thing.



Like, imagine making a thread in PD/GD, then leaving for two weeks only to come back to see that the thread derailed so bad, that the forum is covered with train debris. . .

It's like being a butterfly looking down over a tornado's aftermath and wondering if they were responsible in some way. . .
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 20, 2020, 12:35:37 pm
Absolutely, 100%, beyond a reasonable doubt NOT your fault, Def :)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 20, 2020, 12:49:56 pm
Mp-Ryan, I will point out that the position that you and everyone else has stated as something that was unacceptable and will not be tolerated is also something that Goober has specifically avoided apologizing for.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 20, 2020, 03:30:18 pm
Mp-Ryan, I will point out that the position that you and everyone else has stated as something that was unacceptable and will not be tolerated is also something that Goober has specifically avoided apologizing for.

This expresses my frustrations with goober's apology very succinctly. It feels like he's apologised for misinterpreting another moderator/admin but hasn't for the action that caused the escalation in the first place.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 20, 2020, 04:50:46 pm
And you are all welcome to express your frustrations with that apology.  It is his to defend and explain, if he chooses.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 20, 2020, 07:49:29 pm
My two cents: Ignoring the fact that normal users can't do everything he did, I expect that if it was a random schmo at the center of this instead they would have at minimum had a long ban from PD/GD, and possibly just been banned outright. I understand the tension that comes from wanting to keep core contributors to the community, but that level of double standard is distressing to me.

It's not a double standard if you'd be equally accomodating to the random schmo. If you look down the list at how long it took us to finally ban people like High Max, Iamzack, etc you could make the argument that we are actually far too accomodating before we finally ban someone. In those cases we put up with them being a disruption for months or sometimes years, even when they didn't contribute much else to the community.

Arguing that we're not banning Goober just because he's an admin is rather missing the point that the only reason this wasn't resolved with a simple thread lock is precisely because he's an admin. Normal users would have just gotten a finger wagging and maybe a warning. Goober is being held to a higher standard. If you don't feel that standard is high enough, that's another matter. And you're more than welcome to argue that it should be higher.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: EatThePath on October 20, 2020, 09:02:40 pm
I'll concede the point, as on reflection my familiarity with how forum discipline is currently conducted in general is rather low.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 20, 2020, 09:55:20 pm
It's okay. I simply picked your post as an example of a feeling I've seen from a lot of users that we ban as soon as someone breaks the rules. While that might have been the case in the distant past, it's not been true for many years. I have no problem with people thinking we've been too lenient on Goober, I just don't like people thinking that it's because of favouritism. We're pretty lenient in general these days.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Goober5000 on October 20, 2020, 11:05:26 pm
And to clarify, I do not intend to bring legal action against anyone.  A description that something "is grounds for legal action" is not the same as a threat to actually take that action.

Then why bring it up in the first place? The first response you had to a post you found offensive was to demand it be removed with the stated reason that it was "grounds for legal action". Who was going to bring legal action against the website except you? Do you realize why everyone else in that thread, several people of whom were HLP staff, interpreted it as a threat? What I'm noticing from your apology is that you do apologize for what happened after MP-Ryan prudently locked the thread, but not for your actions that lead to the escalation of that thread in the first place.

I meant it in the sense of "this is a damn serious thing you just wrote".  And I really wish that people would recognize the seriousness of it.

It is not escalation to defend oneself against very serious personal attacks.  On the contrary, the people doing the escalation were the ones launching personal attacks.


Quote
I'm extremely concerned that as a justification for your actions you pointed towards the moderation policies of Gab (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab_(social_network)), a website known for its far-right userbase.

This isn't what happened at all.  Gab refused to remove the posts in question.  Gab's host forced Gab to remove them.


I, personally and speaking outside my role as moderator, don't think that this apology suffices. Why? Because this is, verbatim, what you posted in response to mjn:

This is defamation and libel, which is grounds for legal action.  Retract it.

You had several options in responding to mjn's post. One would be to ignore it as a piece of hyperbole. Another would be to report it to let other moderators take a look. Yet another would be, regardless of how improper it would have been for you to do so, to point to the forum rules and say that this strays close to questionable conduct. Had you taken any of these options, this matter would not have blown up as much as it did.

As I said in the internal, in the past, I was specifically told by the staff to attempt to negotiate first.  That is precisely what I did.

This is not any different than telling someone to remove warez links because posting them is illegal.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlueFlames on October 21, 2020, 12:11:00 am
Contrition is for chumps.  Always double-down.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 21, 2020, 12:13:37 am
This isn't what happened at all.  Gab refused to remove the posts in question.  Gab's host forced Gab to remove them.

So, in other words, this would not be a problem for HLP unless someone reported the website you are an admin for, over a defamatory comment about you, and the company that hosts HLP decided to force us to remove the post over your own protests that they shouldn't interfere with HLP?

Do you see why people might have had a problem with that defence? It's another perceived threat, but this time, against not just Mjn but the site as a whole.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 21, 2020, 12:51:47 am
6.  Goober5000 will be separately posting an apology to the community regarding his actions in particular.

Alright, looks like this isn't happening. What's plan B?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 21, 2020, 01:02:22 am
I suppose it's been pointed out more than once that the decisions of software companies are not laws and have no standing as 'precedent' for anything, yes?

I'm absolutely going to ban myself for another few months aren't I
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 21, 2020, 01:13:39 am
While we're invigilating Gooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooober's various sins I would like to complain, in an opportunistic and long post facto way, about the inconsistent way in which HLP's "we don't edit/delete posts" rule has been applied by moderators and administrators. I have broken it enthusiastically and often but that's probably why I am not a mod any more. To wit, herefore and so forth, et ceteribus, my complaint is: is the word 'cunnilingus' so obscene that it needs to be edited out of posts? I made the rhetorical point once that if Junior Junior could post some Buzzfeed top ten on how to kill people with a handgun, it seemed like it would be equally acceptable to post cunnilingus tips, since consensual sex is ideally less taboo than killing people even in self defense. Note that I did not actually post any cunnilingus tips (put broccoli in your cheeks for better texture). This polemic masterstroke was arbitrarily and high-handedly erased. Do we erase posts or don't we? I get that sometimes it's necessary to remove an obscenity, but in what world is the phrase 'cunnilingus tips' more obscene than somebody's failure drill?

I would also like to advance that Goober does not like Sir Mixalot because Sir Mixalot is
Spoiler:
from Seattle
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 21, 2020, 01:16:19 am
Karajorma, I highly recommend that you move past the discussions you presumably already had with Goober internally. Goober's justifications do not matter, what matters is that he still thinks his actions were justified, and refuses to apologize for them.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 21, 2020, 02:05:44 am
As I said in the internal, in the past, I was specifically told by the staff to attempt to negotiate first.  That is precisely what I did.

Why, in the everburning fires of hell, did you think that threatening people with lawsuits is even in the same general area as "attempting to negotiate"?

This is such a monumental confusion of ideas that words fail me.

You said, in your apology post, that
And to clarify, I do not intend to bring legal action against anyone.  A description that something "is grounds for legal action" is not the same as a threat to actually take that action.

I will keep hammering you on this: For you to even believe that is, to me, evidence that you do not understand the implications that your posts can take on when they have that little "Administrator" tag under your name. Regardless of your intent, the mere fact of the matter that what you posted clearly reads as an implied threat and that you did not clarify your intentions when called out on it paints a clear enough picture. You had a chance, in that thread, to defuse this ****ing thing. You had a chance to back down. You chose not to. You chose to take actions that made this whole mess worse. When called to apologize after a protracted internal discussion, you chose to post something that did not sufficiently address the issue under discussion.

Forum moderation is, in many ways, an area where "policing by consent" is an important concept, and as it should be clear by the hundreds of posts in this and the other threads, you have lost that consent through your choices. In fact, going by at least some people here, the compromise that was worked out threatens the consent between the moderation staff and the forum as a whole. Draw your own conclusions from that.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 21, 2020, 02:10:39 am
my complaint is: is the word 'cunnilingus' so obscene that it needs to be edited out of posts?

Um, no?  When did this occur?  EDIT:  six years ago?!?!  Okay, look, if someone has a grievance older than my daughter (who is 6), in the words of her favorite song:  let it go, let it gooo...  Yes, I realize Lorric did it first but come on man.

AFAIK the only words that would ever be removed [recently, anyway] would be bigoted epithets (racist/homophobic language, generally speaking).  If someone doesn't want to see 'naughty' words, they can turn on their own language filter.  We might have something to say about it if someone starts writing up graphic sex act fanfiction or using HLP as their test ground for graphic erotica, but otherwise...

...Seth, do not make me regret answering this question.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 21, 2020, 02:30:34 am
And you are all welcome to express your frustrations with that apology.  It is his to defend and explain, if he chooses.
Part of the deal was that goober would apologise for his actions. He's failing to live up to his side of it and is going to walk away from this compromise without ever having to admit fault for threatening to sue users.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 21, 2020, 03:30:39 am
I, personally and speaking outside my role as moderator, don't think that this apology suffices. Why? Because this is, verbatim, what you posted in response to mjn:

This is defamation and libel, which is grounds for legal action.  Retract it.

You had several options in responding to mjn's post. One would be to ignore it as a piece of hyperbole. Another would be to report it to let other moderators take a look. Yet another would be, regardless of how improper it would have been for you to do so, to point to the forum rules and say that this strays close to questionable conduct. Had you taken any of these options, this matter would not have blown up as much as it did.

As I said in the internal, in the past, I was specifically told by the staff to attempt to negotiate first.  That is precisely what I did.

This is not any different than telling someone to remove warez links because posting them is illegal.

That's not negotiating. That's a threat. You are an administrator of the forums, engaged in a political discussion with other users, a situation where you are explicitly disallowed from throwing your weight around as an administrator. And yet you still tell a user to remove a post with the implicit threat of legal action and/or moderation action, despite both being clearly invalid. If you were told to negotiate first before, and this is your idea of negotiation, and you still delete the thread anyway, and you still refuse to apologize or accept any responsibility, then please, for the love of all that is good, resign.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 21, 2020, 03:44:39 am
...Seth, do not make me regret answering this question.

Is "white supremacist" a bigoted epiteth?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 21, 2020, 08:19:41 am
my complaint is: is the word 'cunnilingus' so obscene that it needs to be edited out of posts?

Um, no?  When did this occur?  EDIT:  six years ago?!?!  Okay, look, if someone has a grievance older than my daughter (who is 6), in the words of her favorite song:  let it go, let it gooo...  Yes, I realize Lorric did it first but come on man.

AFAIK the only words that would ever be removed [recently, anyway] would be bigoted epithets (racist/homophobic language, generally speaking).  If someone doesn't want to see 'naughty' words, they can turn on their own language filter.  We might have something to say about it if someone starts writing up graphic sex act fanfiction or using HLP as their test ground for graphic erotica, but otherwise...

...Seth, do not make me regret answering this question.

When we say that this response is far too lenient on Goober (btw Karajorma I don't care whether he's banned but he should not still be an admin after this) the response is "well, people deserve second chances". When we point out that this is just the most outrageous instance of a pattern of behaviour stretching back years you scold us for dredging up past grudges. Let's look at some more examples of Goober using his admin position to throw his weight around, against community consensus:

Five years ago (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=90964.0), a thread was made about the hilariously interminable edit war over a harmless pun in the Aeolus wiki page. Literally everyone involved except Goober felt it was a harmless joke which could stay, but he abused his moderator powers to lock the thread and declare that his opinion was the only one that mattered. The subsequent history of that page is convoluted but the upshot is that a couple of weeks ago Goober locked the page again (https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php?title=GTC_Aeolus&diff=62040&oldid=62039) to keep the joke out, against the clear consensus of the community. This also means that useful housekeeping edits can't be made on that page either, something that directly burned Matth's efforts to keep the wiki in shape at one point.

Three years ago (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=92956.msg1837734#msg1837734), the scumbag who had already eulogised Carrie Fisher by bemoaning her "saggy tits and old vagina" made a weird, inane thread about an ancient Greek philosopher. I responded by citing a well-known obscene Latin poem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catullus_16), including a paraphrase of its content, to make the point that just because something is classical doesn't mean it's wise. Goober edited out my post entirely, banned me from GenDisc on the spot, and scolded me for being rude to the guy. This, again, was after every normal member of the forum had been shocked and appalled by the OP responding to the death of a beloved celebrity with bizarre, obscene misogyny, something Goober clearly felt was a less severe infraction than quoting Catullus.

Goober has been pulling this kind of **** for many, many years; he never apologised, backed down or admitted any error of judgement when he thought he could get away with enforcing his preferences on the site in the past, and this total non-apology makes it clear that he hasn't changed in the least bit. As Joshua says: what's your Plan B, when he's failed to live up to his side of your bargain?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 21, 2020, 08:40:55 am
This is Goober's second chance because he and the rest of the staff have never faced consequences after abusing their powers. If Goober's chickens are to all come home to roost, then everyone's chickens must come home to roost.

And while that would be rather cathartic, I don't think it needs to be done. The fact that power abuse can now be held to account might be enough to stop it happening, it's happened in the past because there was nothing to stop it. What seems to have changed is the presence of Axem and MP-Ryan on the staff. It was these two that have been the face of the staff to us the most on this incident.

MP-Ryan seems confident the consequences of breaching the agreement for Goober would be swift and serious, and I trust him. He doesn't have the power as a GM to do anything to Goober himself, but he must have seen enough on the internals to feel confident of that. To lay his reputation on the line like that by giving his word on the matter.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 21, 2020, 08:44:45 am
Phantom_Hoover: Yeah, we're on, like, a 6th chance at this point, but the rest of the admin staff apparently still stand behind Goober.  Not doing so would disrupt the status quo, you see.

And Goober's apology is the thinnest ****.  Very Trumpian though.

"I didn't threaten legal action, I just said that I could sue and demanded retractions!  How could anyone view that as a threat?"

From where I'm sitting, the only thing Goober is actually sorry about is that he got called out by enough people.  He quite clearly still feels like the injured party.

This is Goober's second chance because he and the rest of the staff have never faced consequences after abusing their powers. If Goober's chickens are to all come home to roost, then everyone's chickens must come home to roost.

Oh my god, will you ****ing shut up about this bull****.  No one cares about your personal grudges.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 21, 2020, 09:36:12 am
my complaint is: is the word 'cunnilingus' so obscene that it needs to be edited out of posts?

Um, no?  When did this occur?  EDIT:  six years ago?!?!  Okay, look, if someone has a grievance older than my daughter (who is 6), in the words of her favorite song:  let it go, let it gooo...  Yes, I realize Lorric did it first but come on man.

2014 must have been one hell of a year. That's the 3rd one now.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 21, 2020, 09:57:08 am
In this thread: The issue with making people's unhappiness a measure of success.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 21, 2020, 11:13:50 am
My official response:

There are quite a lot of people with passionate opinions here.  I'm one of them.  As such, I found a false accusation of white supremacy to be extremely offensive.  For the record, I am not a white supremacist, and I disavow white supremacy.

And to clarify, I do not intend to bring legal action against anyone.  A description that something "is grounds for legal action" is not the same as a threat to actually take that action.

I do agree that the splitting and removing the thread was a violation of the principle of not moderating a dispute in which you are a party.  For that I apologize.  As I said in the internal board, I made two mistakes here: I misinterpreted an invitation to make a post as an invitation to take moderator action, and I did not double check before going ahead and doing it.

As MP-Ryan said, I have given my word that I will abide by the agreement we all reached.

Wow.

Not only are you not sorry for what you did, you do not seem to know exactly what it is that you did wrong in the first place.

Interesting.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 21, 2020, 02:14:45 pm
I've been at odds with him for a decade. The man is incapable of actual remorse or empathy. Relationships are transactional.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 21, 2020, 04:43:34 pm
There has absolutely been a theme in this process of non-administrator, non-moderator users being treated as second class citizens. The people who were wronged by Goober, who were threatened with legal action and then censored by him against site policy, were told to shut up and sit tight while the people whose opinions mattered decided what to do behind closed doors, and we've now been handed down a verdict that we got no say in whatsoever which takes almost comical pains to avoid judgement or consequence for the person directly and solely responsible for this incident. When the little users act up we get told we're in violation of such and such a rule and slapped with a ban and a snarky comment. When an admin tramples all over basic rules of how this site is supposedly administered and slinging legal threats, the admins produce something that reads like an air crash investigation, assiduously avoiding actually blaming anyone in favour of neutral suggestions of systematic change.

EDIT: It has been suggested that I delete this post since it falls to properly communicate the point I was trying to make, and which I communicated better in my 2nd post from this one (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=97020.msg1903355#msg1903355). Fair enough. However, in the interest of not rewriting history or confusing people, I'm hesitant to remove it entirely. Instead, I hope this edit sufficiently communicates that you should refer to this post (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=97020.msg1903355#msg1903355) to understand what I tried to communicate in this one. Sorry for the confusion!

You seem to have forgotten one core issue here.

You ARE "second-class" citizens, in the strictest sense: HLP is not a democracy. It's a benevolent dictatorship, and you don't get to vote about who's in charge around here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Nobody's forcing you to stay here if you don't agree with the decisions coming from the conglomerate that is El Presidente here. Benevolent dictatorship.

Personally, I'd rather you didn't go... regardless of any disagreements I may have with you about various things. After all, when all's said and done, we're here for FreeSpace. All the rest of this is optional, community-related fluff.


Moving on...

A major part of the problem people have with the decision the admins and moderators benevolent dictators arrived at is that said decision was arrived at "behind closed doors". That's just something you'll have to live with. You can believe us when we say that it was not arrived at lightly.

FWIW, the same thing happens in (all) governments. Classified information is presented to those in positions of power, information the public cannot be made aware of for various reasons. Those people in positions of power then have to make decisions based on all the information they have. Those decisions, if heavily informed by said classified information, can look odd, illogical, or even downright dumb to the people "in the dark". ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ (I love that kaomoji)

...what we are dealing with here is abuse of power by an admin threatening legal action against members...

Wrong (but I understand the confusion). Anyone is "free" to threaten legal action against anyone else, on or off the forum. Doing so has nothing to do with an abuse of admin power. The latter only happened when he deleted the thread.

There is no reason whatsoever for that thread to remain deleted long after every other admin has acknowledged that its deletion was totally illegitimate.

Yes, there is. While you all have been focusing on one side of the wrongdoings here, you've been utterly ignoring that there is still another side: accusing someone of being a white nationalist is a personal attack, which we do not tolerate here. So now the admins & moderators benevolent dictators who weren't participatory in the original thread need to go through and edit it as we collectively see fit before restoring it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 21, 2020, 04:48:59 pm
Tongue but whole
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 21, 2020, 05:08:18 pm
benevolent dictators

Please sir, while you've come down for your high castle, may I have some more porridge? I'm lowly and poor and only dream of having a position as high and mighty as yours where I don't have to worry about such things.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mongoose on October 21, 2020, 05:25:30 pm
I categorically reject Sandwich's tone, and I daresay the majority of the rest of the staff does too.  We're here to serve the site and its members, not lord a position of power over anyone else.  That's just bull****.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 21, 2020, 05:36:48 pm
Nobody's lording anything over anybody. But HLP was never a democracy. Nobody in the adminship was elected by popular vote of anyone but other admins. Nevertheless, we take a benevolent view on our positions of leadership as much as we can. Like it or not, that's how the site has been run for 20 years. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: perihelion on October 21, 2020, 05:41:07 pm
The person doing the lording is, for what ought to be obvious reasons, not in a particularly good position to judge whether or not they are lording.

What you are saying is effectively, "Shut up and deal with it. You have no say other than to leave."  Piss on that.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 21, 2020, 06:03:24 pm
The person doing the lording is, for what ought to be obvious reasons, not in a particularly good position to judge whether or not they are lording.

What you are saying is effectively, "Shut up and deal with it. You have no say other than to leave."  Piss on that.

No, you're quite free to continue voicing your opinions on this and any other matter. I'm just pointing out that taking a stance of "We demand that such-and-such happen" does not necessarily mean that you will get what you demand.

In a democracy, the people have the actual, factual power to vote out those in positions of leadership. Cold, hard numbers (the votes). No deliberations—the people speak, and it happens.

On HLP, that doesn't exist. Instead, it is run as benevolently as possible by admins and moderators who—when push comes to shove—decide (sometimes unilaterally, sometimes as a conglomerate) on actions to take. We do our best to take into account the desires of the community at large when making those decisions. Our goal is to "bring modders together", and provide them (you all) with whatever tools and advantages we can so that your artistic dream creation can be realized. Everything beyond that is essentially "fluff", if you get what I mean.

So, as a conglomerate group of admins and moderators, we arrived at the decision that has been presented in this thread. You are more than welcome to continue voicing your thoughts and opinions about the topic and the decision and whatever else comes to mind, because we're not "lording" anything over you.

I'm sorry for perhaps presenting it in a way that bothered you—that was not my intent. I just want to explain why you shouldn't necessarily expect a different outcome on account of all the opinions being voiced. Hope that helps you understand where I was coming from. :)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: DefCynodont119 on October 21, 2020, 07:01:47 pm
So basically it's:

Bringing modders together unless an admin makes bizarre legal threats then those modders are free to leave.TM
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 21, 2020, 07:09:55 pm
Bringing modders together unless an admin makes bizarre legal threats then those modders are free to leave.TM
I still don't see the point why some fire from the PolDisc dumpster should burn down HLP.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 21, 2020, 07:50:53 pm
Jesus Christ Sandwich, way to read the room.  You may seriously want to consider deleting this post of yours entirely (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=97020.msg1903341#msg1903341) because your second attempt was much better.

While you are correct that HLP is not run by popular vote, the vast majority of the staff have operated - at least as long as I've been among them - in a manner that tries to make this place better for everyone and doesn't cram our individual views down everyone else's throat.  To describe that as a benevolent dictatorship is just absurd - HLP's community can always vote with their feet (as can staff members, as I shouldn't have to remind you) and this place hasn't been run as a "leave if you don't like it" community in a long time.  People's opinions *do* matter, and their feedback is what makes our decisions better in the long run.  The purpose of allowing that feedback to continue in this thread is for Goober to understand the damage he has done (and hopefully take at least some steps toward making amends) and the rest of us to understand and account for the very real concerns of the community to guide future decision-making.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 21, 2020, 08:04:00 pm
After all, when all's said and done, we're here for FreeSpace. All the rest of this is optional, community-related fluff.

This is the opposite of how you create a welcoming environment for freespace modding, where any and all freespace modders are welcome to participate and indulge in their hobby of playing a dead 20 year old video game that sold so badly it killed an entire genre. You are telling a community of FREDders, modellers, artists, writers, and so much more that you do not care at all what they think, that they're free to leave, and that nothing will be done and no apologies given for threatening other users with a lawsuit and deleting an entire thread after being called out on it.

You ARE "second-class" citizens, in the strictest sense: HLP is not a democracy. It's a benevolent dictatorship, and you don't get to vote about who's in charge around here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Keep calling valuable contributors who have developed so many campaigns and so many engine fixes and improvements for this game we all love and know second-class citizens and see what happens.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Axem on October 21, 2020, 08:19:59 pm
After all, when all's said and done, we're here for FreeSpace. All the rest of this is optional, community-related fluff.

This is the opposite of how you create a welcoming environment for freespace modding, where any and all freespace modders are welcome to participate and indulge in their hobby of playing a dead 20 year old video game that sold so badly it killed an entire genre. You are telling a community of FREDders, modellers, artists, writers, and so much more that you do not care at all what they think, that they're free to leave, and that nothing will be done and no apologies given for threatening other users with a lawsuit and deleting an entire thread after being called out on it.

You ARE "second-class" citizens, in the strictest sense: HLP is not a democracy. It's a benevolent dictatorship, and you don't get to vote about who's in charge around here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Keep calling valuable contributors who have developed so many campaigns and so many engine fixes and improvements for this game we all love and know second-class citizens and see what happens.

I am only jealous because I did not get to make this post.

I didn't sign on to become an admin here to boss people around or denigrate others. I joined because I wanted to help HLP, make it a better place for its users and give the resources they need to make amazing inspirational mods. To a lot of people, this place is bigger than just FreeSpace. It's a community they continually keep in touch with. There's lots of people who don't play Freespace anymore and they still come by because they have internet friends they like hearing from.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 21, 2020, 08:26:43 pm
Jesus Christ Sandwich, way to read the room.  You may seriously want to consider deleting this post of yours entirely (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=97020.msg1903341#msg1903341) because your second attempt was much better.

Fair enough, but deleting it entirely will be confusing for people arriving late to the discussion. How about an edit for clarification?

After all, when all's said and done, we're here for FreeSpace. All the rest of this is optional, community-related fluff.

You are telling a community of FREDders, modellers, artists, writers, and so much more that you do not care at all what they think, that they're free to leave, and that nothing will be done and no apologies given for threatening other users with a lawsuit and deleting an entire thread after being called out on it.

While my first post should have been worded better, you're either misreading it, or intentionally misrepresenting what I said for dramatic purposes.

Don't put words in my mouth, please.

You ARE "second-class" citizens, in the strictest sense: HLP is not a democracy. It's a benevolent dictatorship, and you don't get to vote about who's in charge around here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Keep calling valuable contributors who have developed so many campaigns and so many engine fixes and improvements for this game we all love and know second-class citizens and see what happens.

Second-class purely in the sense that there is no democratic voting system here where you get to elect who is an admin. I should have thought it obvious that that's what I meant by the colon character in my sentence.

From any and all other perspectives, especially with regard to how much everybody's work and contributions are highly valued, there are no second-class citizens here... only outstanding ones.

I would have hoped this was obvious, but the internet at large seems to be ready and eager to be offended more and more these days, and unfortunately HLP is not immune. Nevertheless, we must deal with ever-changing reality or get left in the dust, so I will try to communicate as clearly as I can going forwards.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Scourge of Ages on October 21, 2020, 08:36:01 pm
To a lot of people, this place is bigger than just FreeSpace. It's a community they continually keep in touch with. There's lots of people who don't play Freespace anymore and they still come by because they have internet friends they like hearing from.

Hi, that is me, at least.

I have an opinion, by the way, on the matter at hand.

I am willing to accept the decision of the moderating staff. And while it is difficult, in light of things, I am willing to forgive Goober for his transgressions, even without a real apology. I strongly believe in second (or third, or seventh) chances. If he says it won't happen again, and the staff say it won't happen again, I will trust that everyone means it.

I will not be forgetting though, and I doubt anybody else will. And if something like this happens again, without provocation, we will all know exactly at the thread to point at.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 21, 2020, 08:38:01 pm
...what we are dealing with here is abuse of power by an admin threatening legal action against members...

Wrong (but I understand the confusion). Anyone is "free" to threaten legal action against anyone else, on or off the forum. Doing so has nothing to do with an abuse of admin power. The latter only happened when he deleted the thread.

So, in other words, abuse of power by an admin who was threatening legal action against members is what we're dealing with here?

On HLP, that doesn't exist. Instead, it is run as benevolently as possible by admins and moderators who%u2014when push comes to shove%u2014decide (sometimes unilaterally, sometimes as a conglomerate) on actions to take.

No. Not unilaterally. That is what the moderation staff have been trying to move away from for years! We've spent years pointing out that a single moderator or admin can make a bad call based on their own personal biases or even their mood at the time and as much as possible we should try to go with what will be the consensus if all the moderation staff had been present. No one wants users thinking that the result of an appeal to the moderators will be determined simply by who happens to be awake at the time. No user can possibly feel comfortable posting on a board where the admin they have been arguing against can just suddenly ban them. The days when single admins got to hand down pronouncements from on high have been consigned to the dustbin of history and I'm not unhappy to see them go. The way we are trying to do things now is better for everyone.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Rhymes on October 21, 2020, 09:05:09 pm
Ignoring the asinine and tone-deaf statements of an admin who's barely on the forums anymore and returning to the actual heart of this discussion, I have a question for Goober.

Quote
A description that something "is grounds for legal action" is not the same as a threat to actually take that action.

Do you actually believe this, or do you just think we're all stupid?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 21, 2020, 09:09:20 pm
The distinction itself is a fair one, but Goober was given plenty of opportunities to make it clear which one he was talking about and didn't.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 21, 2020, 09:24:50 pm
Ignoring the asinine and tone-deaf statements of an admin who's barely on the forums anymore and returning to the actual heart of this discussion
Didn't Sandwich actually do quite some working on the website recently?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 22, 2020, 12:34:15 am
I was initially reluctant to jump into this thread, given that what brought me back from hiatus was the chance to help out with Knossos support in ngld's absence, including support requests like these (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=96990.msg1902801#msg1902801) two (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=94068.msg1903377#msg1903377) and bug fixes like these (https://github.com/ngld/knossos/pull/212) two (https://github.com/ngld/knossos/pull/213), and certainly not the chance to get embroiled in heated discussions.

But the fact that a forum admin can make serious threats at other forum members—especially highly respected contributors with track records going back years—and then delete the thread due to the conflict that he chose to escalate not going in a way he liked, with the only personal consequences being very minor restrictions on his moderating powers, really, really bothers me. I was so angry about it last night that I had trouble sleeping.

The non-apology apology, while frankly unsurprising, has just made it even more obvious that the staff's announced resolution hasn't resolved anything.

My $0.02.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 22, 2020, 01:43:45 am
So, as a conglomerate group of admins and moderators, we arrived at the decision that has been presented in this thread. You are more than welcome to continue voicing your thoughts and opinions about the topic and the decision and whatever else comes to mind, because we're not "lording" anything over you.

I'm sorry for perhaps presenting it in a way that bothered you—that was not my intent. I just want to explain why you shouldn't necessarily expect a different outcome on account of all the opinions being voiced. Hope that helps you understand where I was coming from. :)

Shouldn't we, though?

I've been posting here for as close as makes no difference 13 years now. I've been a moderator and global moderator for at least 10 of those. In that time, we have never had a member of the moderation team do something as egregious as Goob has here, and there never, ever was that much of a public outcry about any action taken by any moderator as far as I can recall.
This, to me, says that there must be consequences, and as I argued internally, these should be visible and absolutely NOT limited to a verbal agreement.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 22, 2020, 02:25:56 am
@Sandwich: Yes, I get that HLP is an oligarchy and not a democracy. I am cool with that and always have been, and I don't even think it's necessarily a bad thing.

But if those oligarchs want to have a community worth governing, then they might want to listen to it every now and then, especially when a number of its prominent and/or longstanding members are all saying essentially the same thing.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 22, 2020, 03:32:31 am
I've been coming here since 3dap/game spy days (21 years give or take) and it's definitely one for the books.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 03:34:13 am
"Authoritarianism is good actually" is probably not a good thing to champion in the best of times, Sandwich. Especially when one of your colleagues is under critique for taking said authoritarianism to an absurd degree.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 22, 2020, 04:01:30 am
Nah HLP in general is pretty sound regarding the regulation of behaviour is my belief, and this is coming from someone who suffered a perma-ban in the past (due to hot-linking early Meme images which unbeknownst to me had failsafe in place).

Just a shame that one egg is spoiling the basket,  his apology is pretty specific,  but I would suggest a downgrade to mod if it didn't affect his capability to assist with backend infrastructure,  but this is not possible it seems.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 22, 2020, 04:17:06 am
So, in other words, abuse of power by an admin who was threatening legal action against members is what we're dealing with here?

Let's be exceedingly precise.

An admin deleted an entire forum thread to remove the offense of personal attacks against him. That action was an abuse of power. Concurrently, that admin had also pointed out that the offense against him constituted grounds for legal action. Said pointing out was phrased poorly, in a way that made it appear to be an actual threat of legal action, instead of the intended purpose of communicating that the offense was serious enough that it would qualify for grounds of a legal action, if legal action were the intended purpose.

Do you agree that that definition is factually accurate, without hyperbole or bias, or do you think it needs further tweaking?

On HLP, that doesn't exist. Instead, it is run as benevolently as possible by admins and moderators who%u2014when push comes to shove%u2014decide (sometimes unilaterally, sometimes as a conglomerate) on actions to take.

No. Not unilaterally. That is what the moderation staff have been trying to move away from for years! We've spent years pointing out that a single moderator or admin can make a bad call based on their own personal biases or even their mood at the time and as much as possible we should try to go with what will be the consensus if all the moderation staff had been present. No one wants users thinking that the result of an appeal to the moderators will be determined simply by who happens to be awake at the time. No user can possibly feel comfortable posting on a board where the admin they have been arguing against can just suddenly ban them. The days when single admins got to hand down pronouncements from on high have been consigned to the dustbin of history and I'm not unhappy to see them go. The way we are trying to do things now is better for everyone.

Sorry, evidently that too was an insufficiently-precise phrase, made for the sake of brevity at the time. Let me continue to be precise:

I definitely agree that, when dealing with arguments, strong feelings, personal biases, topics of differing opinions, etc... group decisions are the way to go. :yes: :yes: :yes:

When I mentioned "unilaterally", I was referring to the other moderation actions that fall outside the roiling cauldron of conflict... responding to requests such as "Please split this thread as it's gone off-topic here", or "Hey, there's someone posting links to warez over here". I don't think anyone would argue that those types of moderation actions need to be made as a group, right?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 04:21:41 am
Guys you had ****ing three weeks to discuss this internally. I assumed you had already reached your conclusion and were merely waiting for Goob's apology.

This makes y'all look bad.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 04:26:55 am
I also more in general question the notion of saying someone holds far-right views is offensive when that person has frequently espoused  them. I realize you're not actually on these forums anymore Sandwich, but there's been quite a few accusations of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" thrown about without any moderator action, why would suddenly the classification of one's political beliefs be cause for moderator or legal action? Accusations of far-left political views have, similarily, gone unremarked upon.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 22, 2020, 04:28:10 am
Let's be exceedingly precise.

An admin deleted an entire forum thread to remove the offense of personal attacks against him. That action was an abuse of power. Concurrently, that admin had also pointed out that the offense against him constituted grounds for legal action. Said pointing out was phrased poorly, in a way that made it appear to be an actual threat of legal action, instead of the intended purpose of communicating that the offense was serious enough that it would qualify for grounds of a legal action, if legal action were the intended purpose.

Do you agree that that definition is factually accurate, without hyperbole or bias, or do you think it needs further tweaking?

As I said in an earlier post:
You chose to a) proclaim mjn's statement to be defamation and libel, b) mention that this is grounds for legal action and c) command mjn to retract that statement.
This is, clearly and very unambiguously, a threat.

It doesn't matter that Goober now claims that he didn't intend to make a threat or that he didn't intend to pull through with it. He posted something that, were it uttered in normal conversation, would absolutely be taken as a threat; That he didn't use the words "Retract it, or I'll sue" does not change that analysis, because he chose to double down on those exact words when he was called on it.

You're engaging in the same level of "but I technically didn't make a threat" argumentation that goober is trying to do, you're trying to be extremely literal and extremely precise in a way that simply is not appropriate to the circumstances.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 22, 2020, 04:28:28 am
Many of the recent comments seem to point out that there's a community consensus over what should happen to Goober5000 as an admin, except there isn't. Many of the community members (and I'm one of them) posting on this thread actually disagree with the big-red-button-termination protocol, and our opinion is treated as some sort of background noise. Those who ignore us should at least acknowledge that they're not speaking in the name of every single community member on HLP.

By the way - speaking of consensus! - according to official stats, this community has 17,039 members with fully registered accounts. Good luck trying to determine what's the consensus on anything, and good luck trying to do that in one thread. More importantly, there's no mechanism by which someone's opinion should be preferable over someone else's just because of modding and coding accomplishments throughout the years.

That's why we have forum administrators (hence the "oligarchy - benevolent dictatorship" thing), and the admins themselves have issued an official statement on the matter. Policies on moderation have changed, too. Can't we just move on and hope that future interactions between community members will be better?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 04:31:01 am
Quote
Many of the recent comments seem to point out that there's a community consensus over what should happen to Goober5000 as an admin, except there isn't. Many of the community members (and I'm one of them) posting on this thread actually disagree with the big-red-button-termination protocol, and our opinion is treated as some sort of background noise. Those who ignore us should at least acknowledge that they're not speaking in the name of every single community member on HLP.

I would like to point out that me, and a few others, have changed their minds after reading goob's "Apology".
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 22, 2020, 04:33:09 am
I stand by my statement, and I confirm it's impossible to determine community consensus on anything.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 22, 2020, 04:39:55 am
Many of the recent comments seem to point out that there's a community consensus over what should happen to Goober5000 as an admin, except there isn't. Many of the community members (and I'm one of them) posting on this thread actually disagree with the big-red-button-termination protocol, and our opinion is treated as some sort of background noise. Those who ignore us should at least acknowledge that they're not speaking in the name of every single community member on HLP.

I do fully ackknowledge that I do not speak for you. There.

Quote
By the way - speaking of consensus! - according to official stats, this community has 17,039 members with fully registered accounts. Good luck trying to determine what's the consensus on anything, and good luck trying to do that in one thread. More importantly, there's no mechanism by which someone's opinion should be preferable over someone else's just because of modding and coding accomplishments throughout the years.

...and you wonder why your arguments aren't being ackknowledged? Out of those 17000 members, who is actually active right now? How many of those people are actually in any real sense active members at this point in time?

The actualforum population at any given time is, in a very real sense, less than a hundred people. Right now, I think it's actually less than 50. The people who disagree with the consensus represent a large number of the actually active people in this forum who care about issues of forum moderation, which in itself is a subset of that small number of active users.

Quote
That's why we have forum administrators (hence the "oligarchy - benevolent dictatorship" thing), and the admins themselves have issued an official statement on the matter. Policies on moderation have changed, too. Can't we just move on and hope that future interactions between community members will be better?[/mobius]

No. No, we can't. Not in my opinion as a member of this site, and not in my opinion as a member of the moderation staff.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 05:00:18 am
Guys you had ****ing three weeks to discuss this internally. I assumed you had already reached your conclusion and were merely waiting for Goob's apology.

This makes y'all look bad.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 22, 2020, 05:08:09 am
Good luck even trying to group 1,700 so-called active members and hearing their opinion on the matter. Secondly, even if somebody created an account in February 2003, posted one-liners 5 times and became inactive in December 2004, by the mechanisms I posted above, should get the chance to voice his opinion on the matter in case he decides to come back in October 2020. That'd make the effort of implementing a "general election" or "consensus verification" on HLP extremely difficult.

We should be fine with people having roles. Watching the admins as they make decisions on forum regulations is by no means a way to admit that we're too dumb to make said decisions. It's part of their role. There are circumstances IRL where we make decisions that affect other people, due to the roles that we have in many endeavors.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 22, 2020, 05:14:18 am
I'm inclined to agree with the E.  Go with the majority of ACTIVE people.  Heck I missed out on the thread so feel a bit out of place commenting but that's /English_sensibility so I doubt Billy Bob from 2002 is going to mind if the guys affected at the time carry out a decision making process in his absence.   
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 22, 2020, 05:15:20 am
Guys you had ****ing three weeks to discuss this internally.

Yes, but we realize that that was internal, out of view of the public. There's definitely room for a public discussion as well (as long as it remains civil). :nod:

I also more in general question the notion of saying someone holds far-right views is offensive when that person has frequently espoused  them. I realize you're not actually on these forums anymore Sandwich, but there's been quite a few accusations of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" thrown about without any moderator action, why would suddenly the classification of one's political beliefs be cause for moderator action? Accusations of far-left political views have, similarily, gone unremarked upon.

I would hope that as a community of (most likely) smarter-than-average people, we don't throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. I would hope that we don't espouse the view that political support for one candidate or another doesn't mean that the supporter agrees with 100% of what that candidate says and does. I don't think we view national-level support in that way ("I support my country in general, but gosh-darn they screwed the pooch in this situation!"), so why political candidates?

I support a limited subset of what Trump has done or says he will do, and a limited subset of what Biden says he will do.

Does that mean I support 100% of what Trump says, does, stands for, or is accused of supporting? No.

Does that mean I support 100% of what Biden says, does, stands for, or is accused of supporting? No.

So when a person has stated general political support in one direction is accused of supporting the extreme racist views held by other people who support that same candidate, in what world does that mean that that one person must be a supporter of the views of those other racist people?  :confused: That's an insane connection to make, and even more insane to outright accuse someone of it, openly and repeatedly.

Without seeing the context of those other instances you mention, I would simply say that there's a significant difference between being accused of having "Trump Derangement Syndrome" vs being accused of supporting white supremacy.


Additionally, each person (obviously) chooses to react differently to the same situations. Take the famous McDonald's Hot Coffee legal case. I'm pretty sure statistically that at least one other person had McDonald's hot coffee spill on them and burn them before Stella Liebeck did. Apparently, they didn't choose to sue. Stella did. Were they right or wrong in their choice to not sue? Was Stella right or wrong in her choice to sue? Well, it's not a matter of right or wrong; they were decisions based upon personal choice.

Similarly, other people have, as you pointed out, been accused on this forum of various things before. In Goober's case, he chose to not let it slide. it doesn't make that specific choice (the "not letting it slide" choice, not the "delete the thread" choice) right or wrong. It's completely up to personal choice.

Look at it another way. Decades ago, people "put up with" a lot more stuff than they tend to do now. Mild (or not) racism, anti-LGBTQ sentiment, offensive jokes... a lot of what was glossed-over back then is instead brought to the forefront now. Society is working at not letting the things that deeply bother others "just slide". So why doesn't Goober's insistence that he not be lumped in with white supremacy deserve the same attention?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 05:54:25 am
None of your big-wall-of-text-that-says-surprisingly-little adresses that Goober hasn't espoused support for a political candidate one way or the other, but for specific policies that are percieved as far right. At what point may we call a spade a spade?

Goober choosing "not to let it slide" undercuts the times he himself has accused people of being mentally deranged without repercussion - simply becuase he, as an admin, can not be taken to account for those. The previous situation was one where Goober was able to belittle and troll whenever and whoever he liked, only to commit the worst moderation mishap this forum has ever seen when someone branded him a supporter of Trump (and as a logical conclusion, a supporter of the politics Trump enacts).
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Rhymes on October 22, 2020, 06:11:09 am
I also take issue with Sandwich's attempt to justify Goober's legal threats (because they were legal threats) by comparing it to the Liebeck case. Stella Liebeck didn't just sue McDonalds because she had hot coffee spilled on her. Stella Liebeck sued McDonalds because she, a 79-year-old-woman, got third degree burns all over her goddamn pelvic region.

You are using an old woman being gravely injured to justify someone responding to getting called something mean with legal threats.

**** off, you ghoul.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 22, 2020, 06:36:07 am
What are you talking about? What does any of what you have just posted have to do with Goober's ability to administrate a forum dedicated to modding a 20 year old video game that sold so badly it killed an entire genre?

A political discussion happened, fine, if you're not going to delete political discussion then at least contain it to the proverbial dumpster. This has nothing to do with political discussion. This has everything to do with Goober deleting an entire thread because he didn't like being called out on demanding people remove posts because they were, to him, legally slander (which I take as both a legal threat and a terrible legal threat with no basis in reality), and then refusing to apologize.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 06:38:07 am
So decoupling myself from Sandwhich a moment, what I'm seeing here is simply that the HLP's administration has no view of what actually has gone wrong and as such has no mechanisms to prevent such a thing from ever happening again.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 22, 2020, 07:14:04 am
None of your big-wall-of-text-that-says-surprisingly-little...

Since people kept on misunderstanding what I was writing in the worst possible ways, I've taken to being as precise as possible in my posts. That's how you get a large amount of text that doesn't cover a ton of ground; I'm having to repeat and reiterate my statements multiple times so people can hopefully not misunderstand them.

In vain, apparently, since that entire "wall-of-text" was in response to your quoted paragraph above it, and nothing else. I was responding to the statement that false accusations against people have happened before without the same outcome. That's it.

I also take issue with Sandwich's attempt to justify Goober's legal threats (because they were legal threats) by comparing it to the Liebeck case. Stella Liebeck didn't just sue McDonalds because she had hot coffee spilled on her. Stella Liebeck sued McDonalds because she, a 79-year-old-woman, got third degree burns all over her goddamn pelvic region.

You are using an old woman being gravely injured to justify someone responding to getting called something mean with legal threats.

**** off, you ghoul.

You're misunderstanding what I was getting at%u2014perhaps I need to write a bigger wall.

The parallel I was drawing was that different people have different responses to similar situations: other people have been badly burnt by a hot drink before without taking it to court (a presumption I'm making, but almost a statistical certainty); Stella chose differently and took it to court.

Similarly to that difference, other people have been falsely accused of something before without demanding it be retracted; Goob chose differently and demanded it be retracted.

Nowhere was I making a direct comparison between Goob and Mrs Liebeck, as you presumed I did. I was comparing other people that had been burnt to Stella, and other people that had been falsely accused to Goob.

Different people react differently to similar situations. Goob reacted differently than other people accused falsely. Stella reacted differently than other people badly burnt.

I was responding to the question posed by -Joshua-: "why would suddenly the classification of one's political beliefs be cause for moderator action?" That's it.

Nice sign-off.

So decoupling myself from Sandwhich a moment, what I'm seeing here is simply that the HLP's administration has no view of what actually has gone wrong and as such has no mechanisms to prevent such a thing from ever happening again.

If you could only see the thread in the Global Moderator Corner section, you might think differently.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 07:25:52 am
Then please act according to what was said to that thread rather then having some more bickering on here with your fellow admins and GMs. Everything you've said here has simply been more fuel for the fire, and undermines the faith in HLP's administration. Not only can't it get its own members to apologize for wrongdoings, it can't even provide a consistent, coherent or uniform response to issues.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 22, 2020, 07:43:28 am
Then please act according to what was said to that thread rather then having some more bickering on here with your fellow admins and GMs. Everything you've said here has simply been more fuel for the fire, and undermines the faith in HLP's administration. Not only can't it get its own members to apologize for wrongdoings, it can't even provide a consistent, coherent or uniform response to issues.

You say that as if you know what the contents of that thread were, when obviously you don't (through no fault of your own, but don't act as if you do know). Let me summarize:

Failings and mistakes ALL around. NOT just Goober, and NOT just mjn.mixael or The E or Aesaar or whoever. Yet without my voice in this thread, the chances are slim that anyone would be reminded that there were TWO sides to this issue, both of which have justifiable grievances. There are two sides to every coin.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 22, 2020, 07:45:36 am
I would hope that as a community of (most likely) smarter-than-average people, we don't throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. I would hope that we don't espouse the view that political support for one candidate or another doesn't mean that the supporter agrees with 100% of what that candidate says and does. I don't think we view national-level support in that way ("I support my country in general, but gosh-darn they screwed the pooch in this situation!"), so why political candidates?

EDIT: *SNIP* Political stuff is political.

I'm specifically saying that there absolutely is a wrong side to this. Using both siderism to defend bigotry is a bad call.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 22, 2020, 07:46:38 am
Quote
Not only can't it get its own members to apologize for wrongdoings, it can't even provide a consistent, coherent or uniform response to issues.

Failings and mistakes ALL around. NOT just Goober, and NOT just mjn.mixael or The E or Aesaar or whoever. Yet without my voice in this thread, the chances are slim that anyone would be reminded that there were TWO sides to this issue, both of which have justifiable grievances. There are two sides to every coin.

I refer you to the title of the thread and the OP.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Zacam on October 22, 2020, 08:14:13 am
To be clear: While some may think "benevolent dictatorship" is all well and fine ...

Whoever came up with that is dense.

This is a community. It has a focus and a purpose and a goal.

And that Community? is. pissed.

No amount of "too bad" is going to result in anything but an empty husk being left behind.

And I'm not willing to see this place, and all the work that it's seen, simply shrivel up and die because of some obstinancy by the heavily outnumbered few.

And if you WANT it to be a dictatorship? Then realize you're outnumbered on all fronts on this.

People are still waiting a meaningful apology.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 22, 2020, 08:17:00 am
This is probably getting political enough that it goes outside the scope of this thread... But here was my thought process since you seem to misunderstand.

If you supported Hitler, you supported Nazism. The. End. Whether you knew what you were doing was wrong and would lead to genocide doesn't matter. You have to live with the choices you made. History is written and you played a part in it.

Trump is provably corrupt, provably racist, provably fascist, and barely a small hop away from provably white supremacist. Policy arguments Do. Not. Make it ok to condone such a dangerous man with delusions of staying in power longer than allowed. The man is barely a hop away from provably trying to rig the election. If this were any other country G.W. Bush would have sent in the damn army to preserve democracy already.

So... If you support an aspiring white supremacist authoritarian dictator, guess what that makes you? The argument was never about policy. It's about how incredibly dangerous it is to support this man.

And instead of arguing the point or debating the facts... Goober went straight for the legal option and then when that didn't get him what he wanted, he deleted the (already locked) thread just so he could get his way.



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kkk-insists-theyre-not-white-supremacists/

Quote
PELHAM, N.C. - In today%u2019s racially charged environment, there%u2019s a label that even the KKK disavows: white supremacy.

Standing on a muddy dirt road in the dead of night near the North Carolina-Virginia border, masked Ku Klux Klan members claimed Donald Trump%u2019s election as president proves whites are taking back America from blacks, immigrants, Jews and other groups they describe as criminals and freeloaders. America was founded by and for whites, they say, and only whites can run a peaceful, productive society.

But still, the KKK members insisted in an interview with The Associated Press, they%u2019re not white supremacists, a label that is gaining traction in the country since Mr. Trump won with the public backing of the Klan, neo-Nazis and other white racists.

Now let's say someone on this board was outed themselves as a member of the KKK. Would anyone here honestly give a **** about their claims that the KKK is not a white supremacist organisation? Would we give users who called them white supremacists warnings and bans simply because they felt that the KKK is not a white supremacist organisation in the face of overwhelming evidence that it is? Would we allow any admin or moderator to tell users that they must retract their comment on the basis that it is defamatory?

I don't think we would. So let's not argue that both sides did something wrong. This is not an issue where both sides are equally wrong. Had Goober attempted to refute Mjn's assertions that he supports a white supremacist we wouldn't be here.

What matters here is Goober's abuse of his power. What matters is that Goober promised to make an apology for that abuse of power and whether the community are willing to accept that apology. Any deal that was hammered out on the internal was contingent on the fact that Goober was required to post an apology capable of acceptance from a majority of the community.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 22, 2020, 08:22:41 am
All of you, kill the politics side tangent. That goes doubly for you, Sandwich. You know better and your continual attempts to justify the hole you started digging have simple widened it into a mine. The issue at hand is that a person with Administrator in their title abused their moderation powers egregiously and there are consequences in place. Some members of the community (a large number in fact) have made it clear they don't think those measures are sufficient.

This, right here, is a great example of when it's time to shut up and listen to the community. The active majority have made it clear that Goober's very thin apology is insufficient. They - and I - would very much like to know how Goober intends to actually make amends for his severe lapse in judgement and abuse of his position.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 22, 2020, 08:29:45 am
Any deal that was hammered out on the internal was contingent on the fact that Goober was required to post an apology capable of acceptance from a majority of the community.

Gonna separate this line from the rest of my post since it was the important one.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 22, 2020, 08:39:40 am
I support that statement.  An apology being made and it being accepted are two different things. 

A major factor in acceptance is the perceived sincerity. 

I didn't read much, and I'm being wholly impartial, make of that what you will.   
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 22, 2020, 09:47:24 am
This, right here, is a great example of when it's time to shut up and listen to the community. The active majority have made it clear that Goober's very thin apology is insufficient. They - and I - would very much like to know how Goober intends to actually make amends for his severe lapse in judgement and abuse of his position.

I have to ask, at what stage do the rest of site staff stop giving Goober the initiative? He never admitted he'd made a real mistake when he told us all to repent for the end is nigh and it turned out to be nighn't; how many weeks of this process is it going to take to conclude that he's also not going to make a sincere admission of error and an apology in this case either?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 22, 2020, 10:04:38 am
I've been at odds with him for a decade. The man is incapable of actual remorse or empathy. Relationships are transactional.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 22, 2020, 10:11:06 am
Well at the very least let the man see the last developments on this thread.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 22, 2020, 11:39:27 am
If staff are interested to know whether we accept the apology, even I have to say I was disappointed by Goober's apology, and I had relatively low expectations and requirements for it since I don't care about the legal action thing. It meets the bare minimum requirement of apologising for the deletion of the thread, but nothing more. It comes across as a grudging apology, I won't go as far as calling it insincere, but I do not believe it would have been offered freely, and I do not get a sense that he feels sorry. It's an admission of wrongdoing coming from the head, knowing he was wrong in his head, rather than coming from feeling he did wrong in his heart.

Even the legal action thing which didn't matter to me, I don't buy the "rules lawyering" as others have called it defence of the action. If it was me, and that was the truth, I would still realise how easily it could be misinterpreted as a threat, and apologise for that. It would have been better in my eyes if he'd said nothing on that.

Goober hasn't done anything to make me feel any confidence he won't reoffend if he gets his authority back with his apology. It is only the removal of that authority and threat of action on him if he does break his word that make me feel relatively okay with letting him keep his administrator status, for the good of HLP with the work he does that requires it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlueFlames on October 22, 2020, 11:54:29 am
Well at the very least let the man see the last developments on this thread.

Assumes he's still reading the thread and doesn't consider his obligations met.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 22, 2020, 12:04:33 pm
I think I get it.

Our goal is to "bring modders together", and provide them (you all) with whatever tools and advantages we can so that your artistic dream creation can be realized. Everything beyond that is essentially "fluff", if you get what I mean.

Undeniably, the goal is to bring modders together. The disposition of those modders, if they are or are not white supremacists, is secondary. It equally does not matter if they threaten community members with legal action, while being in a position of absolute power (the likes of a "benevolent dictator" level of power), on a website where they collect and store the IPs of every poster.

Fair enough.

I am somewhat confused when it comes to the following though:

I would hope that we don't espouse the view that political support for one candidate or another doesn't mean that the supporter agrees with 100% of what that candidate says and does. I don't think we view national-level support in that way ("I support my country in general, but gosh-darn they screwed the pooch in this situation!"), so why political candidates?

I support a limited subset of what Trump has done or says he will do, and a limited subset of what Biden says he will do.

Does that mean I support 100% of what Trump says, does, stands for, or is accused of supporting? No.

Does that mean I support 100% of what Biden says, does, stands for, or is accused of supporting? No.

So when a person has stated general political support in one direction is accused of supporting the extreme racist views held by other people who support that same candidate, in what world does that mean that that one person must be a supporter of the views of those other racist people?  :confused: That's an insane connection to make, and even more insane to outright accuse someone of it, openly and repeatedly.

I think someone in this thread mentioned the example before - if a person says that they love Hitler's (I know, going back to that old chestnut, I'm sorry) taxation, foreign policy, infrastructural policy, but do not approve of in any way his literal orders at the Wannsee Conference to build concentration camps so as to enact The Holocaust, then, is that fine? I mean, they say they love his political ideology, and him perhaps as a person, because they read he was an avid dog lover, and he was great with children too, but it is just all the mass slaughter of ethnic minorities that was not cool.

I am not saying Trump is comparable to Hitler (then again, the United States does have concentration camps for Mexicans and South Americans, but they are not actively committing mass murder there, so there's a big difference I guess), but I mean, the principle is somewhat the same, and fits your analogy there, does it not?

According to your definition, as I understand it, the above hypothetical example seems to be perfectly fine. Like, I personally would think that approving of Hitler on any level would be terrible, because we know what the end result of all of his policies was, and it was absolutely ****ing horrifying, but some people may actually think differently.

Or am I misunderstanding something?

I am also not being glib. I am genuinely curious as to what goes here on HLP discussion wise.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: DefCynodont119 on October 22, 2020, 12:12:28 pm
I also want a re-attempt on that apology, being an admin is more then just maintaining site backend, it's about building trust with a community that you share in interest with, and what goober did was break that trust.

I don't care if he was making a threat or threatening-to-make-a threat, what he did was intimidating, unnecessary, and it made everyone angry.

If goob cannot understand that we have no assurances that this won't happen again.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 22, 2020, 12:34:22 pm
-snip-

While your questions for Sandwich are legitimate, we've already asked a few times that we keep the political discussion out of this thread (including a reminder that Sandwich do so as well).  Please take it to PM with him - at least as far as your second quote-reply goes.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 22, 2020, 12:47:45 pm
Failings and mistakes ALL around. NOT just Goober, and NOT just mjn.mixael or The E or Aesaar or whoever. Yet without my voice in this thread, the chances are slim that anyone would be reminded that there were TWO sides to this issue, both of which have justifiable grievances. There are two sides to every coin.

There are heroes on both sides. Evil is everywhere
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 22, 2020, 12:53:00 pm
If goob cannot understand that we have no assurances that this won't happen again.
Why is an "extra chance" even deserved here? Can an admin get away with any action, no matter how egregious, as long as they do it "just once" and promise that it will never happen again?

EDIT: Retaining admin status qualifies as "getting away with it".
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 22, 2020, 01:07:44 pm
This is where the fun begins.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 22, 2020, 01:16:59 pm
Putting the message in my last post more diplomatically, is there anything an admin could do "just once" that would result in their admin powers being revoked with no "extra chances"? If not, why not? If so, why isn't this on that list?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 22, 2020, 02:02:00 pm
I think the forums behaviour policy should be in quicklinks as I couldn't find it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 22, 2020, 02:48:31 pm
This is where the fun begins.

Game Time Started. Our dichotomy opens the combat. (https://youtu.be/XziLNeFm1ok?t=225)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 22, 2020, 03:14:29 pm
This is where the fun begins.

Game Time Started. Our dichotomy opens the combat. (https://youtu.be/XziLNeFm1ok?t=225)

My god, that's a genuine work of genius.

Apologies for going off-off topic.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 23, 2020, 06:00:16 am
*stuff*
I am also not being glib. I am genuinely curious as to what goes here on HLP discussion wise.

I would genuinely love to discuss this with you (and others). Want to create a new thread in PolDisc for it? Not sure how active I'll be due to no email notifications yet, but I'll try. :)

I think the forums behaviour policy should be in quicklinks as I couldn't find it.

It's a sticky in this very same board: https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=87037.0

Which part of the UI are the "quicklinks" you refer to?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 23, 2020, 06:32:46 am
Mabye the forum rules should just be in their own subforum, at the top of the pages, that merely says "The Rules". It makes it easier to find then it is now at least.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 23, 2020, 08:16:56 am
*stuff*
I am also not being glib. I am genuinely curious as to what goes here on HLP discussion wise.

I would genuinely love to discuss this with you (and others). Want to create a new thread in PolDisc for it? Not sure how active I'll be due to no email notifications yet, but I'll try. :)

I think the forums behaviour policy should be in quicklinks as I couldn't find it.

It's a sticky in this very same board: https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=87037.0

Which part of the UI are the "quicklinks" you refer to?

Just at the top, anywhere in the nav bar.   Figured it might be there.


Appreciate the link though.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: 0rph3u5 on October 23, 2020, 11:48:49 am
I stand by my statement, and I confirm it's impossible to determine community consensus on anything.

Good luck even trying to group 1,700 so-called active members and hearing their opinion on the matter. Secondly, even if somebody created an account in February 2003, posted one-liners 5 times and became inactive in December 2004, by the mechanisms I posted above, should get the chance to voice his opinion on the matter in case he decides to come back in October 2020. That'd make the effort of implementing a "general election" or "consensus verification" on HLP extremely difficult.

Speaking as someone who has experience with organisation and execution of official referrenda and elections: While consensus (as in 100% percent agreement of the electorate) is usually an illusionary goal, determining an electorate and holding a vote across HLP wouldn't be that hard. A long and boring process to establish and execute, yes, but hard, no. Most of the effort is usually spend on securing the vote would not be prejudiced by the procedure and as long as there are no bad faith actors involved that can be settled rationally (most of the time there is usually spend on explainations and mix and matching various options to the cirucmstances, again boring and lengthy not difficult).

The only issue is that due to the subject matter, there is a problem with having an accountable authority to vouch-safe the integrety of a poll on the matter at hand...
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: 0rph3u5 on October 23, 2020, 12:16:06 pm
Put a pin in that - I didn't consider a few technical problems with securing the secrecy of a vote. (But that wasn't really the thing, I think Moebius was talking about, so seperate issue)

(While on principle optional, secrecy is kinda important to a social desirablity bias out of the vote)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 23, 2020, 09:28:52 pm
Might I suggest including in the forum rules a "Rules and Expectations for HLP Staff" section. I've heard that mods/admins are (supposedly) held to a higher standard than users, but I've never seen an explanation of what that actually means. The higher standard apparently applies even to former staff, as this ironic blast from the past (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=76988.msg1530824#msg1530824) quoted below would indicate.

Guys, you really ought to know better -- especially Fury!  He gets a month's ban for being a former admin who should be leading by example, not leading negatively by example. :wtf:

But anyway...

Many of the recent comments seem to point out that there's a community consensus over what should happen to Goober5000 as an admin, except there isn't. Many of the community members (and I'm one of them) posting on this thread actually disagree with the big-red-button-termination protocol, and our opinion is treated as some sort of background noise. Those who ignore us should at least acknowledge that they're not speaking in the name of every single community member on HLP.
I, for one, never said there was a consensus. I said
[...] a number of its prominent and/or longstanding members are all saying essentially the same thing.
Note that I said prominent and/or longstanding; that is, people who've shown commitment to the community over time, where "commitment" can take a variety of forms and doesn't necessarily entail content/code contributions. It can mean playing or even just contributing to discussions. In numbers, their collective opinion should carry extra weight, even if not every last member who's shown commitment agrees with them and even though they don't speak for everyone.

We should be fine with people having roles. Watching the admins as they make decisions on forum regulations is by no means a way to admit that we're too dumb to make said decisions. It's part of their role.
Yup, I don't think making HLP more democratic would necessarily be a good thing, and I get that admins will sometime make decisions that make a lot of people unhappy. I had my own taste of that with wxL. (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=67950.msg1687517;topicseen#msg1687517) But notice that, in that post, Iss Mneur and I explained in detail why we made the decision we made, even if it was an unpopular one. I just re-read this thread's OP and found no explanation for why the staff considered points 6 and 7 to be the best way to handle an admin who openly threatened other users and abused their powers.

Can't we just move on and hope that future interactions between community members will be better?
Speaking personally, without real answers to my questions above (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=97020.msg1903488#msg1903488) and a real apology from Goober, I can't. I know that the staff is under no obligation to reconsider their decision, and they probably aren't even obligated to answer my questions.
 
And while I'm always free to vote with my feet, I'd rather try to see if the staff can find a resolution that doesn't leave me walking away from a chance to support this community, which over these past 9 years has meant more to me than I could ever put here. When I lost most of my vision nearly seven years ago, I never wrote about it then on social media, only here (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=53623.msg1729788#msg1729788). Ditto when I had to ditch an important friend (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=53623.msg1816538;topicseen#msg1816538).

 
BTW, speaking of "support", I was able to resolve the two (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=96990.msg1902885#msg1902885) recent (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=94068.msg1903540#msg1903540) Knossos support requests. So I certainly didn't come back just to stir up this thread. :)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 23, 2020, 09:49:11 pm
Might I suggest including in the forum rules a "Rules and Expectations for HLP Staff" section. I've heard that mods/admins are (supposedly) held to a higher standard than users, but I've never seen an explanation of what that actually means. The higher standard apparently applies even to former staff, as this ironic blast from the past (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=76988.msg1530824#msg1530824) quoted below would indicate.

Guys, you really ought to know better -- especially Fury!  He gets a month's ban for being a former admin who should be leading by example, not leading negatively by example. :wtf:

But anyway...

(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/705/934/3a7.jpg)

That did not age well.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 23, 2020, 10:28:29 pm
Putting the message in my last post more diplomatically, is there anything an admin could do "just once" that would result in their admin powers being revoked with no "extra chances"? If not, why not? If so, why isn't this on that list?

There are plenty of things that would result in no extra chances. Deleting the thread wasn't done against the wishes of the other administrators but more because Goober believed he had permission to deal with that thread. The way he dealt with it raises serious questions about his competence as an admin but I wouldn't classify it as a "Do that and you're gone" style abuse of administrative powers. Especially since Goober did say that deleting the thread was a mistake.

That said, Goober did promise to apologise and what he has posted thus far is completely lacking.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 23, 2020, 10:45:03 pm
Might I suggest including in the forum rules a "Rules and Expectations for HLP Staff" section. I've heard that mods/admins are (supposedly) held to a higher standard than users, but I've never seen an explanation of what that actually means. The higher standard apparently applies even to former staff, as this ironic blast from the past (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=76988.msg1530824#msg1530824) quoted below would indicate.

Guys, you really ought to know better -- especially Fury!  He gets a month's ban for being a former admin who should be leading by example, not leading negatively by example. :wtf:

Amazing.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 24, 2020, 11:29:55 am
Aren't these the rules to live by? (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=66227.0)

I don't know.
Now, that was glib.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: The E on October 24, 2020, 11:44:05 am
For those without access to the project lead board, this is the first post in the linked thread, titled "Rules for Leaders":

Galemp found this on a poster in a Verizon store and forwarded it to me.  I think it's absolutely brilliant, so I'm reposting it here.  Remember this when you manage your projects. :)

1. Leadership is an opportunity.  The title of leader doesn’t make you a leader; it merely affords you the opportunity to become one.  In fact, the title really only buys you enough time to influence your employees or to lose their respect.  It is unwise to believe you’ve suddenly become more competent because of a promotion.

2. Leadership must be earned.  A leader doesn’t automatically have followers; he has subordinates.  How you act as a leader determines whether or not your subordinates become your followers.  Subordinates only follow you as far as they have to.  Followers, on the other hand, go the second mile.

3. Leadership requires results.  Ultimately, leaders are measured by their results, not their good intentions.  You must continue to prove yourself each day because tenure and experience are not substitutes for results.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 24, 2020, 11:46:01 am
I didn't know if it would be divulging privileged information to take things out of private into public, so I linked it.

But yeah, that's it.

I don't want it to seem like I'm ragging on Goober too much. He and Sandwich do have a point that competence matters, and that in certain cases, for certain purposes, it should come first. So I'm actually not for banning him, even considering all the things he's done in the past, that the public does not even know. I mean, if he goes, who would we point to as an example of what not to do, or be.

It's just that technical competence is not where things stop. There are other skills to hone. And sometimes, the lack of those skills means that even though all of the technical competence is there, things still do not get done.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 24, 2020, 12:00:14 pm
I feel all of this is immaterial since Goober hasn't even replied yet.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 24, 2020, 12:05:34 pm
It may be somewhat cathartic though.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 24, 2020, 12:16:02 pm
I feel all of this is immaterial since Goober hasn't even replied yet.
I'm not sure if there's any point in him doing so. What would you have him say? I don't want him to post an insincere, manufactured apology designed to tick the necessary boxes, and a redesigned apology would make me suspicious that that is all it is.

I don't think he thinks what happened was wrong, only the fact it shouldn't have been him doing it that was wrong.

He might not be the only one who thinks that considering that thread is still after all this time not restored.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mongoose on October 24, 2020, 12:24:26 pm
...the thread was put back a day or two ago.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 24, 2020, 12:28:03 pm
I'm not sure what Goober could post at this point either, but an unconditional "I was wrong and I'm sorry" would at least improve my expectations of him.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 24, 2020, 12:33:41 pm
...the thread was put back a day or two ago.
:)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Assassin714 on October 24, 2020, 06:03:54 pm
...the thread was put back a day or two ago.
:)

Where is it? I still want to know what exactly he said that got him accused of being a white supremacist.

Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 24, 2020, 06:31:44 pm
There are plenty of things that would result in no extra chances. Deleting the thread wasn't done against the wishes of the other administrators but more because Goober believed he had permission to deal with that thread. The way he dealt with it raises serious questions about his competence as an admin but I wouldn't classify it as a "Do that and you're gone" style abuse of administrative powers. Especially since Goober did say that deleting the thread was a mistake.
Thank you, kara.

That all sounds fair to me and qualifies as
[...]  real answers to my questions above (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=97020.msg1903488#msg1903488)

TBH, I still don't understand why the staff agreement allows Goober to continue posting in GD/PD, but I guess that's a case of
I get that admins will sometimes make decisions that make a lot of people unhappy
and IMO it's not worth my getting riled up over that alone.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Scourge of Ages on October 25, 2020, 12:25:03 am
Where is it? I still want to know what exactly he said that got him accused of being a white supremacist.

It's the "turn over of power" thread from pol-disc: https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=96929.0
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 25, 2020, 06:19:05 am
...the thread was put back a day or two ago.
:)

Where is it? I still want to know what exactly he said that got him accused of being a white supremacist.

here it is (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=96929.msg1902289#msg1902289)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 25, 2020, 01:24:07 pm
As for
That said, Goober did promise to apologise and what he has posted thus far is completely lacking.

Reviewing the crux of his public statement...

I do agree that the splitting and removing the thread was a violation of the principle of not moderating a dispute in which you are a party.  For that I apologize.  As I said in the internal board, I made two mistakes here: I misinterpreted an invitation to make a post as an invitation to take moderator action, and I did not double check before going ahead and doing it.
This is all technically correct, but it misses the point as to why I and a number of other forum members are deeply angry about his actions.

I can't tell whether Goober
But I'll be forgiving and assume (1).

First, I do get that Goob would take perceived attacks on his moral integrity extremely seriously. I learned early on from a PM conversation with him that he does have a very strong sense of morals, even if those morals may be markedly different from a number of other users', including mine:

In full disclosure, I subscribe to a moral code [...]
The details/context aren't important, and even though it was over 9 years ago, the point stands.

Thus I buy Goober's perspective that he saw his reply to Mjn as a vigorous and justified defense against what he perceived to be an unfounded and deeply offensive attack on his character. I disagree sharply with Goob on a long list of political and religious matters, but he's no white supremacist. :no: :nono:

Yes, I know Mjn said
First... I accused Goober of being a white supremacist supporter.
However, Goober perceived it as "white supremacist", even if incorrectly, and perceptions matter.

Similarly—and very importantly—even if Goob
many of us perceived (and still perceive) his behavior very differently, and again, perceptions matter.

In fact, I learned this point on my very first day here:

My first post on HLP (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=76514.msg1518457#msg1518457) offered proofreading services to campaign designers. The original version of the post included some text that I intended as a lame "har har" joke.

But someone happened to find that extra text deeply offensive. And the whole thing blew up in my face. (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=76523.0)

Fun fact about that thread:
Spoiler:
If TopAce hadn't jumped in right away with his, uh, distraction, I would have left that first day and never come back, humiliated as I was. :blah: But luckily, things turned out differently.

Suppose that a ton of people had found that text offensive and not just one person. In that scenario, it might well have been reasonable to expect me to post a public apology for a remark that many perceived as inflammatory, even if I thought it was completely innocuous. Because, once again, perceptions matter.

And I was a nobody who had just joined. Consider how much higher the stakes would have been for an incident of far greater magnitude involving someone who had been on the forum for years, with "Administrator" under their name.

Oh, and for the record, I did apologize. Here's an excerpt from a PM I sent to Goober shortly after that:
And as I mentioned on IRC, I'm really sorry about this mess. I didn't expect my post to cause any of that, although in retrospect I guess I should have. I was expecting that people would look at the username, roll their eyes, and ignore it. I guess that's what they would have done if I hadn't included that extra paragraph about the username origin.
(For anyone who didn't know, "jg18" is not the username I registered under.)

Anyway, that's my take on what happened. Hope that helps move the conversation forward. :)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 25, 2020, 01:30:13 pm
The TL;DR of all of that: it's possible that both sides were acting in good faith and the fundamental issue may have been serious differences in perceptions, but perceptions matter and they matter a lot.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 25, 2020, 04:47:57 pm
I know I'm stating the obvious, but I think a basic problem here is that the United States is in a really bad spot politically.

While Donald Trump is not so much a white supremacist as a Trump supremacist, he's happy to support anyone who'll support him, including white supremacists. So you hit a thorny question: is supporting someone who supports white supremacists because they support him morally equivalent to supporting white supremacists? (Unsurprisingly, mjn and I would both say 'yes'.)

This is assuming you are willing to concede that Trump supports and emboldens white supremacists. Goober was willing to disavow white supremacy, which is laudable and is more than Trump has done. I think Trump understands, in one way or another, that refusing to ever give his opponents anything, even a concession to 'disavow white supremacy' or 'respect the results of the election', makes him look stronger to his base. If you refuse to acknowledge any part of your opponent's worldview, even basic facts, then there's no way you can lose a debate.

I wrote a lot of other stuff but I don't see it going anywhere interesting or constructive.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 25, 2020, 05:43:51 pm
To restate the post I deleted earlier in the thread, If you support Hitler purely because of his infrastructure policy, you're still a Nazi.

If Trump being so unwilling to disavow white supremacy isn't a dealbreaker for Goober, then clearly Goober doesn't have as much of a problem with white supremacy as he wants to think he does.

Had he been alive in the 30s, he's the kind of person who'd have said Hitler wasn't actually serious about the antisemitism.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 25, 2020, 06:32:56 pm
This is assuming you are willing to concede that Trump supports and emboldens white supremacists. Goober was willing to disavow white supremacy, which is laudable and is more than Trump has done. I think Trump understands, in one way or another, that refusing to ever give his opponents anything, even a concession to 'disavow white supremacy' or 'respect the results of the election', makes him look stronger to his base.

If Trump being so unwilling to disavow white supremacy isn't a dealbreaker for Goober, then clearly Goober doesn't have as much of a problem with white supremacy as he wants to think he does.

See, this is what I mean when I refer to an "echo chamber". Here on HLP - and indeed, in much of the internet communities - the falsehood that gets repeated constantly is that Trump won't denounce white supremacy.

This is not only a lie, it's an easily disprovable lie (I found the articles below in 5 minutes of Googling)! C'mon, people... do some basic fact-checking before you simply echo what you hear. I'm sure Trump provides plenty of "ammo" to use in your arguments against him; there's no need to repeat the falsehoods.

2017: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-40929627
2019: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/trump-condemns-racism-bigotry-and-white-supremacy.html
2020: https://www.voanews.com/usa/amid-growing-criticism-trump-condemns-white-supremacy
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 25, 2020, 06:39:38 pm
I think it would be intensely counterproductive to litigate in this thread the question of whether Goober is a white supremacist or a supporter thereof, because that’s not what’s actually at issue here. The general consensus, as I understand it, is that correct or not it was an acceptable remark to make in the context and therefore the issue here is Goober making legal threats and then unilaterally deleting the whole discussion.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 25, 2020, 06:48:06 pm
This is assuming you are willing to concede that Trump supports and emboldens white supremacists. Goober was willing to disavow white supremacy, which is laudable and is more than Trump has done. I think Trump understands, in one way or another, that refusing to ever give his opponents anything, even a concession to 'disavow white supremacy' or 'respect the results of the election', makes him look stronger to his base.

If Trump being so unwilling to disavow white supremacy isn't a dealbreaker for Goober, then clearly Goober doesn't have as much of a problem with white supremacy as he wants to think he does.

See, this is what I mean when I refer to an "echo chamber". Here on HLP - and indeed, in much of the internet communities - the falsehood that gets repeated constantly is that Trump won't denounce white supremacy.

This is not only a lie, it's an easily disprovable lie (I found the articles below in 5 minutes of Googling)! C'mon, people... do some basic fact-checking before you simply echo what you hear. I'm sure Trump provides plenty of "ammo" to use in your arguments against him; there's no need to repeat the falsehoods.

2017: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-40929627
2019: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/trump-condemns-racism-bigotry-and-white-supremacy.html
2020: https://www.voanews.com/usa/amid-growing-criticism-trump-condemns-white-supremacy

Putting the response where it belongs. (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=91203.msg1903688#msg1903688)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 25, 2020, 08:11:43 pm

In general I agree with Phantom but I'll just say, it's very telling that he always needs to be asked twice.

e: mjn beat me
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 26, 2020, 05:05:42 am
It's been a few days now since the staff actually gave any kind of update on this situation (except for Sandwich arguing with people...) so I have to ask what's going on. It seems to be nearly universally acknowledged that Goober's 'apology' is insultingly inadequate and has restored no confidence at all in his position, but it's on staff now to make the next move. I have to again reiterate my concern that this issue will get bogged down in the HLP mode of infinite discussion, no consensus and relaxation to the status quo.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 26, 2020, 07:40:20 am
It's been a few days now since the staff actually gave any kind of update on this situation (except for Sandwich arguing with people...) so I have to ask what's going on. It seems to be nearly universally acknowledged that Goober's 'apology' is insultingly inadequate and has restored no confidence at all in his position, but it's on staff now to make the next move. I have to again reiterate my concern that this issue will get bogged down in the HLP mode of infinite discussion, no consensus and relaxation to the status quo.

It is still being actively discussed with the admins and moderators. Goober took the weekend off to have a break from everything, and AFAIK he intends to jump back in today. I apologize that this is taking as long as it is; hopefully now that the emails are working again and the weekend is over, things will progress a bit faster.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 26, 2020, 11:29:06 am
Oh, from the way things were going, I thought this was resolved.

Thanks for the update, good to know you guys are still discussing it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Spoon on October 26, 2020, 01:36:42 pm
What a lovely thread filled with ancient grudges that are being dredged up. Personally I had deemed it obvious that Goober wasn't fit for admin leadership for years now, and I had thought that had become pretty apparent in the thread about avatars. Where he displayed all his strange ideas about hierarchy on a dead forum for a 20 year old dead game about fictional space ships. And if that wasn't enough, the thread where he publicly humiliate himself for all to see in his 'rapture is coming because a few stars are going to allign' should have tanked any and all credibility he may have once had.
I find it pretty telling about the state of HLP that all of this thread isn't even related to FS2 but was caused by american politics. Actual posting about the game and its mods seems to have almost completely dried up while a 'drama' thread gets all the attention. Whether Goobs stays as admin in this wasteland or not doesn't really concern me all that much at this point, for these are my final two posts on HLP. But he should probably stand back and stand by. :V

In fact, I learned this point on my very first day here:

My first post on HLP (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=76514.msg1518457#msg1518457) offered proofreading services to campaign designers. The original version of the post included some text that I intended as a lame "har har" joke.

But someone happened to find that extra text deeply offensive. And the whole thing blew up in my face. (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=76523.0)

Fun fact about that thread:
Spoiler:
If TopAce hadn't jumped in right away with his, uh, distraction, I would have left that first day and never come back, humiliated as I was. :blah: But luckily, things turned out differently.

Suppose that a ton of people had found that text offensive and not just one person. In that scenario, it might well have been reasonable to expect me to post a public apology for a remark that many perceived as inflammatory, even if I thought it was completely innocuous. Because, once again, perceptions matter.

And I was a nobody who had just joined. Consider how much higher the stakes would have been for an incident of far greater magnitude involving someone who had been on the forum for years, with "Administrator" under their name.

Oh, and for the record, I did apologize. Here's an excerpt from a PM I sent to Goober shortly after that:
And as I mentioned on IRC, I'm really sorry about this mess. I didn't expect my post to cause any of that, although in retrospect I guess I should have. I was expecting that people would look at the username, roll their eyes, and ignore it. I guess that's what they would have done if I hadn't included that extra paragraph about the username origin.
(For anyone who didn't know, "jg18" is not the username I registered under.)
''''Deeply offensive.'''' No lol, try 'mildly annoyed'. Even looking back at that thread I still find myself agreeing with the point I made, it's pretty dumb to join a community and starting off by selecting a name and a first post specifically to let everyone know that you found an old joke in someone's signature offensive. I would say that you could have done what you expected other people to be doing. Roll your eyes and ignore it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That being said, though. Boy, is it rough reading some of my old posts. Young Spoon had no chill, and I was often needlessly confrontational and probably under the impression that the world owed me something and that my opinions on things were important for all to hear. So yeah, even if I still agree with the point of my posts then, I could have delivered it in a significantly more diplomatic way. Or, ideally, I should have just rolled my eyes and ignored it.
So yeah, I'll just do what Goober seems incapable of doing here, and apologize for needlessly being a jerk to you back then, jg18.
Also know that it was never anything personal and I never held it against you or anything, it was just the way I posted back then, communicating in a very direct manner (speaking my mind) without really giving too much thought about the feelings of the person on the other end of the internet tube.

Anyway, peace out nerds.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 26, 2020, 02:02:49 pm
Your very public reminder that this thread is not for discussion of politics, and most especially who is (or is not) a white supremacist or supporter thereof.  Any further posts on that matter will be relocated to Political Discussions (none of the previous comments have been for the sake of thread integrity), moderators and administrators included.

Thank you to those who have already done so.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 26, 2020, 03:37:35 pm
But he should probably stand back and stand by. :V

Holy ****, my sides have left orbit.

Bye Spoon!

I kind of agree with the assessment on HLP as a whole, but what do you expect, it's a 20 year old game about fictional spaceships.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 26, 2020, 04:18:23 pm
Discord though
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Rhymes on October 26, 2020, 05:55:26 pm
no joshua haven't you heard everything must be doom and gloom forever it's the latest thing
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 26, 2020, 07:43:08 pm
Discord though

Yep. All the action is happening on there. So the forums look quiet.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jg18 on October 26, 2020, 08:51:07 pm
Aww, among Spoon's last words here was a legit apology to me. :o Sad to see him go, though.

And yeah I'll admit my entrance/username thing was a dumb idea. But eh, it was 9 years ago, so whatever.

Back to this....

It is still being actively discussed with the admins and moderators. Goober took the weekend off to have a break from everything, and AFAIK he intends to jump back in today. I apologize that this is taking as long as it is; hopefully now that the emails are working again and the weekend is over, things will progress a bit faster.
Cool. Looking forward to reading what Goob has to say.

Discord though

Yep. All the action is happening on there. So the forums look quiet.
Huh, interesting. I'll have to get back on that, then.


EDIT: Small correction.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MatthTheGeek on October 27, 2020, 01:47:43 am
Discord though

Yep. All the action is happening on there. So the forums look quiet.
This isn't 2001 anymore. Forums are mostly used for releases and status updates, not for daily talk. Except for the people who crave so much attention and drama that they have to let poldisc live I guess.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 27, 2020, 02:36:30 am
Poldisc is there so that the discord can tell people to shut up and go back to the forums if they want to talk about how the Great Awakening is happening soon or something :P
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 27, 2020, 07:33:35 am
For the record, PolDisc is there so the oft-contentious content therein stays out of GenDisc.

And Discord sucks. That UI makes very little sense. :wtf:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 27, 2020, 07:44:06 am
For the record, PolDisc is there so the oft-contentious content therein stays out of GenDisc.

And Discord sucks. That UI makes very little sense. :wtf:

It's a glorified IRC client, it seems perfectly sensible to me. Servers on the far left, channels on the left, the actual text in the middle, text box at the bottom. Can't make more sense then that.

Also you have a terrible sense of humour  :P
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 27, 2020, 07:52:01 am
It's a glorified IRC client, it seems perfectly sensible to me. Servers on the far left, channels on the left, the actual text in the middle, text box at the bottom. Can't make more sense then that.

No, the big-picture panel arrangement is fine; it's all the little stuff cluttering it up that are annoying. But that's OT.

Also you have a terrible sense of humour  :P

Them's fighting words there.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jr2 on October 27, 2020, 08:59:05 pm
*skims thread*  Yup, I was right.  You guys... do you.  Side note: ah, never mind, I can leave PolDisc from my profile.  Ciao! 

@Goobs: told you so.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 28, 2020, 02:11:53 pm
This, right here, is a great example of when it's time to shut up and listen to the community. The active majority have made it clear that Goober's very thin apology is insufficient. They - and I - would very much like to know how Goober intends to actually make amends for his severe lapse in judgement and abuse of his position.

/me takes note of the date

I hasten to add that I don't harbour any particular ill-will towards Goober, as he's a man who once told me:
I have noticed that, despite your political views, you tend to be a little more sane and a little less foaming-at-the-mouth than certain other people.

However we've been closing in on this situation being a month ago now and it still hasn't come to any sort of conclusion, let alone where the conditions as stated in the OP have been met.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 28, 2020, 02:41:39 pm
Joshua, I understand the eagerness to see things resolved properly. I can say that I now understand why governments seem to take AGES to get anything accomplished... and that we are still actively working it out. If I had to give a progress estimate, I'd say 70-80%, but don't quote me on that.

I mean... I guess you can literally quote me on that? Just don't hold it as a pinky swear. ;)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 04:14:53 am
If I had to give a progress estimate, I'd say 70-80%, but don't quote me on that.

If after a month you're 80% through your efforts in trying to make Goob apologize, mabye something is wrong with you.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 04:17:22 am
I sincerely hope you realize that there's a lot more to this situation than just that.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 04:38:21 am
The arrangement in the OP makes it sound very simple tbh. So I assume that's off?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 04:38:59 am
There REALLY isn't. Literally everyone except you and Goober thinks that he needed to sincerely apologise -- something which now seems impossible given how deeply he's dug in at this stage -- or cease to be an administrator here. You're stalling, and knowing the HLP playbook you will continue to stall indefinitely no matter the damage. Don't think that nobody noticed that Goober ceased to be an admin for a time yesterday, and is now back, and that now Axem is no longer an admin.

I was going to quip earlier in this thread that it is easier to imagine the end of HLP than the end of Goober's petty authority. That is now a very serious concern. How many good people, how much hard-earned community confidence, will burn for the sake of your stubbornness?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 04:40:15 am
Quote
Don't think that nobody noticed that Goober ceased to be an admin for a time yesterday, and is now back, and that now Axem is no longer an admin.

Wait what?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 04:41:41 am
Well, Axem isn't an admin anymore at the least.

What the actual ****?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 04:43:09 am
I guess we're gonna get the Benevolent Dictatorship of Sandwich and Goober by simple attrition of all the admins who actually respect anyone except themselves.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 04:45:31 am
... Good thing FSPort and STR are compatible with FS2 retail  :nervous:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 29, 2020, 05:08:41 am
HLP is not a democracy. It's a benevolent dictatorship, and you don't get to vote about who's in charge around here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Nobody's forcing you to stay here if you don't agree with the decisions coming from the conglomerate that is El Presidente here. Benevolent dictatorship.

Personally, I'd rather you didn't go... regardless of any disagreements I may have with you about various things. After all, when all's said and done, we're here for FreeSpace. All the rest of this is optional, community-related fluff.

I certainly am here for FreeSpace. I would love to be here for FreeSpace.

I am no longer capable of believing that you are here for FreeSpace.

I suppose now's the time to make a lifeboat and start migrating to discord, that is if I don't just give up on modding this 20 year old game that sold so badly it killed an entire genre.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 05:10:07 am
Bringing Axem in was a pretty big deal back in the day. The community had to push and push to get an admin added who was actually active and engaged with the community after years of slow distancing; there was a real sense of the admins being an old guard who were bizarrely jealous of their privileged status on a modding forum. And in the course of a month that's all gone. I have no idea what happens going forward. Maybe we all become Spoon and decide that the HLP bulletin board is a lost cause. Ironically the SCP and the Discord have much more functional governance than this place, and coincidentally Goober and Sandwich aren't governing them...
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 05:14:18 am
If any of the remaining admins or staff are reading this: there is no way out of this that doesn't involve some amount of damage to the community. I think anyone who's read this thread can see that the question is who takes the brunt of that damage: is it Goober losing his authority, or the many, many other community members who have expressed no confidence in him being told, once again, that they don't matter and they just need to shut up and lump it. The utilitarian calculus here seems clear. There is a way forward that has a future for HLP.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 06:14:29 am
Quote
Don't think that nobody noticed that Goober ceased to be an admin for a time yesterday, and is now back, and that now Axem is no longer an admin.

Wait what?

I noticed, he hadn't his Discord role anymore too.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 06:25:39 am
Axem has left the Discord entirely and I'm really worried that it's not just a break, that this toxic ****show has lost us one of the friendliest, most helpful and most productive people the community has seen.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 29, 2020, 06:29:54 am
What the **** is going on?
(fwiw, I can confirm also seeing the goober de-admining that happened last night)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 06:30:33 am
Well the scripting board could just as well be deleted if he doesn't come back; he made like 90% of it and the few not broken ones could be moved elsewhere.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 29, 2020, 06:33:04 am
There's serious chatter on the discord looking at how to migrate stuff off hard-light.net, and being left in the dark isn't helping anyone.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 06:36:09 am
Again, you don't know what has gone on behind the scenes. I will say that Axem left of his own accord, and it is up to him if he wants to tell you the reasons why. All I will say about those reasons is that it was not "caused" exclusively by just Goober and myself, but by actions that everyone "else" took as well. I am hoping he will reconsider his decision, as I do not want anyone to leave.

Let me reiterate: You are unaware of what has been going on. Once things have settled down, I would like to see everyone informed of what has happened, hopefully by someone who has been fairly neutral and levelheaded throughout all this (Fineus comes to mind).
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 06:38:08 am
Let me reiterate: You are unaware of what has been going on.

yes, we are very much aware that we're unaware.

Please address this problem.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 06:39:52 am
Goober and myself, but by actions that everyone "else" took as well.

So it's you two vs everyone else hmmm?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 29, 2020, 06:40:55 am
Let me reiterate: You are unaware of what has been going on.
I am well aware I don't know what's going on, that is the problem. The core issue here is a site leadership that is cold, distant and unwilling to listen to users and this is just exacerbating the situation!
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 06:41:41 am
The warmest member of which has left. The most actually active of which aren't replying.

Like, Sandwich, you hardly ever post on these forums and branded basically everyone who still does as "second-class citizens". With all due respect: **** you and send someone else.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: JSRNerdo on October 29, 2020, 06:45:11 am
Let me reiterate: You are unaware of what has been going on. Once things have settled down, I would like to see everyone informed of what has happened, hopefully by someone who has been fairly neutral and levelheaded throughout all this (Fineus comes to mind).

At this rate when things have settled down (assuming they even will) there won't be anyone left to inform of what has happened.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 06:47:57 am
Let me reiterate: You are unaware of what has been going on.

yes, we are very much aware that we're unaware.

Please address this problem.

Do that, staff guys.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 06:49:43 am
The warmest member of which has left. The most actually active of which aren't replying.

Like, Sandwich, you hardly ever post on these forums and branded basically everyone who still does as "second-class citizens". With all due respect: **** you and send someone else.

My kingdom for anyone on staff except Sandwich to communicate about this ****show. I hate how he’s single handedly made himself the goddamn spokesperson here.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 06:50:54 am
The warmest member of which has left. The most actually active of which aren't replying.

Like, Sandwich, you hardly ever post on these forums and branded basically everyone who still does as "second-class citizens". With all due respect: **** you and send someone else.

Funny how when someone says "with all due respect", what they follow it with has none.

Nobody is preventing anyone else from posting here; I honestly don't know why none of the other admins or global mods have given any updates.

And I'm well aware that I've been mostly absent for years. "Real life" (as if what goes on on the Internet isn't real, but whatever) tends to be vastly more important to focus on as you get older and have more responsibilities. I'm hardly the first person to have done so (remember Shrike, Setekh, etc?), and I'm sure I won't be the last.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 06:52:02 am
My kingdom for anyone on staff except Sandwich to communicate about this ****show. I hate how he’s single handedly made himself the goddamn spokesperson here.

Funny how I'm the only one bothering to update you guys, and you attack me for it. Again, I hope someone else will join in.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 06:53:06 am
And I'm well aware that I've been mostly absent for years. "Real life" (as if what goes on on the Internet isn't real, but whatever) tends to be vastly more important to focus on as you get older and have more responsibilities. I'm hardly the first person to have done so (remember Shrike, Setekh, etc?), and I'm sure I won't be the last.

Yes I am very much aware of your real life responsibilities, I am just questioning why you have decided to only take a break from those when you could call the forum "second class citizens". Or why you have returned seemingly only to fend for a person who the entire community at this point thinks has ****ed up.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 06:53:48 am
Funny how when someone says "with all due respect", what they follow it with has none.

Well done, Sandwich, you figured out the subtext. That is exactly the amount of respect you are due.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 06:57:29 am
Funny how when someone says "with all due respect", what they follow it with has none.

Well done, Sandwich, you figured out the subtext. That is exactly the amount of respect you are due.

Well he's indeed the only one communicating so stop that bull****
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 06:58:01 am
I'm being rude, I know. I'm sorry.

Sandwich isn't actually communicating, he's communicating a lack of communication.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 06:59:07 am
Yes I am very much aware of your real life responsibilities, I am just questioning why you have decided to only take a break from those when you could call the forum "second class citizens". Or why you have returned seemingly only to fend for a person who the entire community at this point thinks has ****ed up.

Citizens get to vote who is their leader. In that sense, and only in that sense, the community members here are what is often called "second-class citizens" - part of the community in every possible sense, with the exception of an ability to vote in leaders.

I apologize for using that term - it's understandable that you found it offensive. That was not my intention. I was attempting to communicate a point about the ability to elect leaders by popular vote - nothing more than that. Would you forgive me for that, if nothing else?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 06:59:57 am
I'm being rude, I know. I'm sorry.

Sandwich isn't actually communicating, he's communicating a lack of communication.

Well he was working on the site, that's something that requires technical skill and not being the perfect communicator. Still he happens the only one who remotely responds.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 07:02:10 am
Yes I am very much aware of your real life responsibilities, I am just questioning why you have decided to only take a break from those when you could call the forum "second class citizens". Or why you have returned seemingly only to fend for a person who the entire community at this point thinks has ****ed up.

Citizens get to vote who is their leader. In that sense, and only in that sense, the community members here are what is often called "second-class citizens" - part of the community in every possible sense, with the exception of an ability to vote in leaders.

I apologize for using that term - it's understandable that you found it offensive. That was not my intention. I was attempting to communicate a point about the ability to elect leaders by popular vote - nothing more than that. Would you forgive me for that, if nothing else?

Do you also realize that part of the reason why it's considered offensive is because it appears true in more ways then you just mentioned?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 07:03:56 am
But that's what you often end up with. You have people running it and people going there. Always has been that way.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 07:04:04 am
Do you also realize that part of the reason why it's considered offensive is because it appears true in more ways then you just mentioned?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean; could you elaborate?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 07:07:57 am
Do you also realize that part of the reason why it's considered offensive is because it appears true in more ways then you just mentioned?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean; could you elaborate?

We're absolutely being treated as second class citizens by you and, perhaps most importantly, Goober, who is free to belittle and insult everyone for any reason he likes and abuses his moderation powers as soon as pushback happens. And when push comes to shove, he can't even apologize. Instead we get a lecture by you about how the power system works on a website you haven't actually participated in in a decade.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 07:08:19 am
Funny how when someone says "with all due respect", what they follow it with has none.

Well done, Sandwich, you figured out the subtext. That is exactly the amount of respect you are due.

Well he's indeed the only one communicating so stop that bull****

Yes, he makes a fair point in that regard that this is more a sign of dysfunction on the rest of staff than from him. At the same time he has lost all respect with that “I’m a benevolent dictator of HLP and all the modders and players are second class citizens” ****.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 07:10:08 am
Quite frankly I'm surprised Goober isn't just willing to owe up at this point. Or smack us down for dissenting.

Just anything at all.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 07:12:21 am
The line that “this is all being sorted out internally by staff, be patient” is now a bad joke given that we can hear the gunfire and explosions from the staff board and Axem just got wheeled out on a gurney.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 07:15:13 am
Quite frankly I'm surprised Goober isn't just willing to owe up at this point. Or smack us down for dissenting.

Just anything at all.

1) Well Goober has been Admin for 17 or 18 years, and it has been a major hobby for him so it's nothing you probably just would give up; especially not over a rather limited problem.
2) He intends to continue being Admin here so he wouldn't do something that would be more abuse (leave alone that such things could be reverted by other Admins).
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 07:18:47 am
We're absolutely being treated as second class citizens by you and, perhaps most importantly, Goober, who is free to belittle and insult everyone for any reason he likes and abuses his moderation powers as soon as pushback happens. And when push comes to shove, he can't even apologize. Instead we get a lecture by you about how the power system works on a website you haven't actually participated in in a decade.

I must have missed where Goober "belittl[ed] and insult[ed] everyone"; link please?

What I did see was other people going from debating the topic to issuing personal attacks.

Goober was wrong in his deletion of the thread. He has acknowledged that, and apologized for it. I'm well aware the community deemed it insufficient; I wasn't all that happy with it either. Now, there would have been (and still might be) another apology issued; I've been working with him on that this week.

However, due to the events which took place over the last 24 hours (which I want to inform you of as soon as I can; probably later today), only some of which you are aware, I cannot guarantee that Goober's refined apology is forthcoming. I will be encouraging him to post the apology despite what has happened, but there's simply no guarantee. I haven't spoken with him yet today.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 07:21:32 am
The line that “this is all being sorted out internally by staff, be patient” is now a bad joke given that we can hear the gunfire and explosions from the staff board and Axem just got wheeled out on a gurney.

I can't even begin to imagine what y'all are speculating really happened.

Axem's departure is a decision I truly hope he reverses; he has been pretty darn level-headed throughout most of this.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 07:21:38 am
Man, if all this results in is Axem leaving, goddamn, something really is wrong with the way things are.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 07:23:12 am
Why does it have to take you a week to come up with something I can do in 5 seconds? Are you trying to finely craft a PR statement?

Quote
I must have missed where Goober "belittl[ed] and insult[ed] everyone"; link please?

If you're going to cast judgement that is apperently opposed to "everyone else" and haven't even kept up with Goober's conduct over the years, what are you even doing?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 07:24:07 am
Man, if all this results in is Axem leaving, goddamn, something really is wrong with the way things are.

Agreed.

I do have to point out that I really, really should be working right now, so I may have to excuse myself for a number of hours here. Sorry I can't stick around and give you regular updates.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 07:29:23 am
Why does it have to take you a week to come up with something I can do in 5 seconds? Are you trying to finely craft a PR statement?

If you must know, he and I were working on it, intermittently back and forth (we do have other RL responsibilities, you know) from midday Tuesday my time, to midday Wednesday. We were awaiting admin/mod response to something internally after that, and then the sh*t hit the fan.


Quote
I must have missed where Goober "belittl[ed] and insult[ed] everyone"; link please?

If you're going to cast judgement that is apperently opposed to "everyone else" and haven't even kept up with Goober's conduct over the years, what are you even doing?

Balancing my real-life responsibilities (I'm a 42-year-old father of 3), with my work on a new forum theme for HLP so we can upgrade past the PHP version we're stuck on. Not every admin can do everything.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: qazwsx on October 29, 2020, 07:33:09 am
If you must know, he and I were working on it, intermittently back and forth (we do have other RL responsibilities, you know) from midday Tuesday my time, to midday Wednesday. We were awaiting admin/mod response to something internally after that, and then the sh*t hit the fan.
Neither of you seem to actually understand what people are angry about. I don't see how an apology crafted by you two will help.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 07:36:00 am

Quote
I must have missed where Goober "belittl[ed] and insult[ed] everyone"; link please?

If you're going to cast judgement that is apperently opposed to "everyone else" and haven't even kept up with Goober's conduct over the years, what are you even doing?

Balancing my real-life responsibilities (I'm a 42-year-old father of 3), with my work on a new forum theme for HLP so we can upgrade past the PHP version we're stuck on. Not every admin can do everything.

I am very much aware of that, which is why I question your conduct throughout this thread.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 07:57:12 am
So the HLP staff have managed to try and do something right and made it worse than if they'd done nothing at all.

(https://tstoaddicts.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/little-lisa-recycling-plant-lil-lisa-slurry-simpsons.jpg)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 29, 2020, 08:38:25 am
Since people have asked for someone other than Sandwich to communicate what's going on and Sandwich is agreed (several posts ago) and I have a few minutes before work this morning:  A majority of active staff have called for Goober's removal since the abuse of power situation arose.  A majority of staff have also indicated they will resign if Goober's admin status continues.  We attempted a compromise that clearly did not work.

If you see several staff are no longer staff in the coming days (myself included, as of Friday if the situation persists), you now know why.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 08:42:24 am
Are there any emergency plans to draft new staff members in that case?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 29, 2020, 08:43:46 am
Are there any emergency plans to draft new staff members in that case?

That is a question I'd suggest addressing to Sandwich and Goober.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 08:44:30 am
Since people have asked for someone other than Sandwich to communicate what's going on and Sandwich is agreed (several posts ago) and I have a few minutes before work this morning:  A majority of active staff have called for Goober's removal since the abuse of power situation arose.  A majority of staff have also indicated they will resign if Goober's admin status continues.  We attempted a compromise that clearly did not work.

If you see several staff are no longer staff in the coming days (myself included, as of Friday if the situation persists), you now know why.
I don't understand. How does the minority get to overrule the majority? Is it HLP ownership that wants to keep Goober as admin?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 09:02:13 am
Are there any emergency plans to draft new staff members in that case?

That is a question I'd suggest addressing to Sandwich and Goober.
I think this may provide the answer to my earlier question.

Possibly, staff wanted to de-admin Goober and did so. Sandwich re-admined him. Axem de-admined himself in protest, and more staff will resign in protest at this, leaving Goober and Sandwich running the show.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 29, 2020, 09:04:22 am
Since people have asked for someone other than Sandwich to communicate what's going on and Sandwich is agreed (several posts ago) and I have a few minutes before work this morning:  A majority of active staff have called for Goober's removal since the abuse of power situation arose.  A majority of staff have also indicated they will resign if Goober's admin status continues.  We attempted a compromise that clearly did not work.

If you see several staff are no longer staff in the coming days (myself included, as of Friday if the situation persists), you now know why.
I don't understand. How does the minority get to overrule the majority? Is it HLP ownership that wants to keep Goober as admin?

Nope. We're just being too nice. People are saying they'll leave rather than kicking out the people who are the problem.


Nobody is preventing anyone else from posting here; I honestly don't know why none of the other admins or global mods have given any updates.


I'm not surprised you don't understand why. The main reason I haven't posted was mainly down to showing both yourself and Goober more respect by not discussing what is going on in the internal than you've shown us with your hints about it. (That and the fact that my Internet has decided today is a good day to break down, leading to me having to do this on the phone)


You want a post. Given that your intransigence over losing Goober is a major factor in us possibly losing Axem, fine I'll post.


As far as I'm concerned Goober has been given every chance to apologise for his actions. Instead last week Goober reiterated on the global moderator board that he feels that should the global mods and admins not agree with his definition of defamation he'd feel entitled to look into legal options.


That was my last straw. And I called for Goober to be de-admined. I've tried to be fair to Goober given his long history on this board but at this point I no longer give a damn what is in that apology. I simply do not trust it.


At this point every single admin or global mod except for Sandwich who has commented agrees that Goober should go. We've posted as much on the internal.


Last night, the actual de-admining was handled badly. I'm not going to into the details but plans had been discussed but were largely ignored.
This appears to have been Axem's last straw and he de-admined himself over it. I don't blame him as I almost followed him. The global moderators have also expressed severe frustration with how this entire fiasco has been handled and I'd bet money on them also leaving if Goober remains an admin.


So why do I still have the title admin next to my name? Why didn't I quit too? Because I feel that HLP deserves better. If I quit, it would be to go to whatever People's Front of Hard Light site got set up. No. The community has spent years building up our reputation as THE place for Freespace. It shouldn't be burned down because one person can't stand to hear some uncomfortable truths.


Quite frankly I feel I bear some of the blame for this mess. Instead of slapping Goober down as an admin for his threat to sue, I challenged him to also sue me like a regular forum member might have. This was meant as an attempt to head off any drama rather than escalate it to the point where it would require anything more serious than a clarification from Goober that he didn't intend to sue or bully other users.


That was a mistake as I hadn't considered that Goober would be this stubborn.


This was also a mistake because it means as someone involved in the altercation on the thread, I have felt a pressure to stay out of the discussions over how to resolve things.


 Given the events today, I don't feel that it is helpful to do that when I'm dealing with a pair of admins who feel that the rest of the forum shouldn't have a say in how HLP is run because it is a benevolent dictatorship.


Goober has to go. He cannot remain an admin on HLP. I didn't want to post that earlier because I was a coward. I didn't want to face accusations of rabble rousing. I no longer care about that.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mongoose on October 29, 2020, 09:09:46 am
I will also step down if Goober is not removed. Right now we have a situation where one admin is standing against the wishes of every other staff member, most of whom have been FAR more active here over the past several years than he has. I want no part of a staff where Goober is deemed competent to help run a site.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 09:15:28 am
Okay, so none of us second class citizens had any idea it was like that.

If that is the case, Sandwich and Goober should just post whether they want to remain the two sole admins of HLP or not. If they say yes, then that should be that.

Everything else has been argued I think.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 09:19:15 am
Maybe I'm naive here but why not just, uh, remove them both? Take the IDF approach to collateral damage here?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 09:19:42 am
That's really the crux of the matter though, right? Doing the right thing.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 09:25:56 am
The whole discussion is just so dump. So much arguing over what? An not-apology for some lapsus and bs happening in PolDisc? I wish the staff members had spend the time arguing playing SR instead of stiring up that amount of drama. I don't think anybody just running away deserves any king of respect.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 09:27:46 am
Also a big ****ing F in chat for Axem, our Bob Ross, our Steve Irwin, a guy who just loved FreeSpace so much and wanted to help other people love it too. And he was so nice, so Canadian, that he'd rather leave than honestly tell you how much he can't stand some of you.

Can't yall do triage? Axem's dead, you've got people bleeding out all over, the guy(s) responsible are over there. How is shooting yourselves going to help?

The whole discussion is just so dump. So much arguing over what? An not-apology for some lapsus and bs happening in PolDisc? I wish the staff members had spend the time arguing playing SR instead of stiring up that amount of drama. I don't think anybody just running away deserves any king of respect.

**** off. Axem's a saint.

EDIT by MP-Ryan to adjust Nightmare's quote after he kindly changed some wording at my request.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 09:29:04 am
Yeah I'm sorry Axem, was mostly refering to the rest of the staff.

I just had enough of this.

E. clarified some wording
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 29, 2020, 09:30:05 am
Maybe I'm naive here but why not just, uh, remove them both? Take the IDF approach to collateral damage here?

Remember what I said about being too nice?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 09:32:33 am
The whole point is that it's not about the PolDisc topic. This has been a theme for at least the last ten years, and this was just the straw that broke the camel's back. A latest in the series. The question is simply does the series continue, or not.

Interestingly enough, if things really are like this, I do really wonder what powers admins have to begin with, considering they do not seem to be able to affect change. I guess this whole fiasco highlights the organizational inefficiency of HLP to begin with.

Also, RIP Axem. Guy was probably the best of us.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: X3N0-Life-Form on October 29, 2020, 09:32:59 am
...
...
Thank you both for giving us a clearer update. I think I've heard enough for the time being, we all know where this is going.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 29, 2020, 09:34:22 am
Axem was easily one of the most positive forces in the community. Now he's gone so we can keep around someone who's ego is so large he wants to sue people on the internet.

(https://64.media.tumblr.com/8a7144c134e1d515b8dc75b2522214a3/tumblr_p110lpn4hl1qbj6jho3_400.gif)
(Go watch Letterkenny. It's excellent. And Canadian... Like our fallen hero)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 09:50:36 am
Just from an absolutely cold-blooded utilitarian standpoint of what's good for FS modding, if you gave me two buttons, and one said Ban Axem and one said Ban Goober, and I had to push one or a hydraulic press would crush a little Shivan, I would not shoot myself, I would ban Goober.

And if you gave me two more buttons and one said Ban The E and one said Ban Sandwich, from the perspective of a FreeSpace modder, a rando who wants to get help doing things in FreeSpace Open, I would ban Sandwich in a heartbeat. My dude does CSS or something, E ran the entire SCP.

From a more human and partial perspective, this website is practically The E's life, he's been through so much **** and this place has been a constant for him. He doesn't deserve to be forced out in protest seppuku against an indifferent administration.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 09:57:25 am
From my own human and partial perspective, I gave up on well-intentioned, earnest involvement with HLP's administration years (a decade?) ago, after Goober's breeding camp manifesto and his accusations that a woman was becoming emotional and refusing to answer his questions. Only when walked through the thread post by post did he realize that he had missed her response; he was the one who had failed to reply. Whether his emotions were to blame he did not say.

I feel there's maybe an analogy here.

So if you value an alternate universe 'Battuta stays nice and does not routinely ban himself for months at a time in order to curb his memes' I guess there's that to weigh, but it's sort of ephemeral compared to the actual community heroes dropping like flies here.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 09:58:42 am
Sounds about right to me, but it does seem like two people are more equal than other people.

Sandwich was right. This is not a democracy, even at the admin level. Some admins are second class citizens too, it seems. Most of them even.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 10:01:34 am
Last night, the actual de-admining was handled badly. I'm not going to into the details but plans had been discussed but were largely ignored.
This appears to have been Axem's last straw and he de-admined himself over it. I don't blame him as I almost followed him. The global moderators have also expressed severe frustration with how this entire fiasco has been handled and I'd bet money on them also leaving if Goober remains an admin.

For the record, this is the event I had been mentioning that went down last night. Kara does not want to go into the details; in all honesty, neither do I. However, it's still important for you all to know what happened. So for the sake of having an accurate public record of it, here is what Axem posted, in full, on the Global Moderators board:

I stand by what I said before, I don't think it is in HLP's best interests to have Goober as admin. Trying to get this whole overall issue resolved has been like pulling teeth and shouldn't be this hard. Why does it take 3 weeks to just keep coming back to the same conclusions over and over.

But you know what else? It's not in the best interests for HLP to have the rest of you either.

I'll admit to having off HLP discussions with a group of staff for the purposes of making sure Goober is held to account of his improprieties. I will also admit that I agreed with them that Goober should be removed. But the execution of events here is so amateurish and ham-fisted it boggles the mind at all of everyone's basic mental competencies.

In our discussions it was brought up that we would bring Sandwich into the loop with the seriousness with what was going on. Faced with this ultimatum, would things have just gotten pushed back again (likely the fear that caused this to happen) or accepted as the will of the staff? Good question, but it's pointless since it's obvious that ship has burned to the ground now.

But sure, let's get impatient and just de-admin Goober like that. Keep it a surprise and have zero actual plan afterwards. What on earth could possibly go wrong?

Well, apparently this! And you want people to trust your leadership now?

HLP doesn't deserve any of you. Given everything that has just occurred and my involvement, it would be inappropriate for me to remain as a staff member here. Curse me, call me a traitor, label me as untrustworthy, I don't care. I'm done with all of you.

Goodbye.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 29, 2020, 10:02:22 am
Huh... maybe Goober's world-ending scenario might come true after all. It's just the HLP world and not all of reality.

Battuta, I have missed you.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 29, 2020, 10:04:05 am
At this point I think it's fairly obvious that Goober and Sandwich both consider Goober's pride more important than the well-being of this community.

HLP was on the decline already, and losing its most dedicated remaining members is going to accelerate that significantly.  You two are going to be the dictators of a ghost town.

But hey, at least Goober will still have his pride.  And that's what really matters, isn't it?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 10:06:59 am
Yeah, I don't blame Axem to be honest, and his decision there.

That said, the solution he was gunning for from the start seems to be the correct one. Dragging this on has served no one at all, and just had you lose good men. I guess we'll find out how many more need to be lost.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 29, 2020, 10:09:36 am
Literally the only thing keeping me here is the BtA team who are relying on me and a bullet list of projects I intend to finish... and I always finish my projects.

That said.. these projects can be completed elsewhere if that needs to happen.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 29, 2020, 10:21:01 am
Ahhh. So Sandwich's Hail Mary is to try to shift the blame and claim all the admins and mods are bad when he doesn't actually know what went wrong with the de-admining or who was responsible.

Since you're happy to post Axem's post in public, probably against his wishes since he didn't make any public comment, is there any reason we shouldn't be de-admining you?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 10:25:52 am
If there's one thing that's become clear in the last hour or two it's that after this is done, if there's still an HLP left, the admin/leadership team will need to be taken apart and put back together again.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 10:34:51 am
Since you're happy to post Axem's post in public, probably against his wishes since he didn't make any public comment, is there any reason we shouldn't be de-admining you?

https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=97056.new#new
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 29, 2020, 10:36:12 am
Putting my money where my mouth is... cancelling my monthly site donation until I see where this is going. I'm not paying for a benevolent dictatorship.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 10:38:44 am
Who is going to stay? In particular, will any admin besides Goober or Sandwich stay?

EDIT: Karajorma's post would seem to indicate he won't be leaving. So that's one.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlueFlames on October 29, 2020, 11:14:44 am
L'etat, c'est mois.

I see Goober is willing to watch HLP burn right to the ground, as long as he doesn't have to give up his title, like a good fascist benevolent dictator.  I wonder if Sandwich can recognize the difference between a benevolent dictator and a malicious dictator.

I know I haven't contributed much to the community in years/decades, but for what it's worth, if the site staff mass-resigns and HLP becomes the Goob & Sandwich Funhouse, then I'm going to bounce.  You two need to look further than the end of your own noses to see what damage you've done.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 11:22:29 am
Maybe I'm naive here but why not just, uh, remove them both? Take the IDF approach to collateral damage here?

I'm quite sure that the IDF approach would just shoot anyone who protests tyvm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018%E2%80%932019_Gaza_border_protests)

Quote
As far as I'm concerned Goober has been given every chance to apologise for his actions. Instead last week Goober reiterated on the global moderator board that he feels that should the global mods and admins not agree with his definition of defamation he'd feel entitled to look into legal options.

****ing hell, he really is an irredeemable asshole.
And a fascist! Did he bring up how other white supremacists have been trying this same tactic?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 11:27:04 am
Oh wow even Sandwich is now going rogue. We see what you did with that thread there.

Guess now that Axem's gone there's no reason to keep to an agreement he posted here?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 11:29:17 am
Oh wow even Sandwich is now going rogue. We see what you did with that thread there.

Guess now that Axem's gone there's no reason to keep to an agreement he posted here?

Split-locking personal attacks from a thread in PolDisc is not going rogue. And yes, I know you see what I did with the thread. That's why I wrote that I did that. So you would see it. Unlike some people, I don't act in the shadows.

What agreement?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 11:33:40 am
What agreement?

...

Do you read the threads you post in?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 11:34:14 am
He's even put an edit into Zacam's post about the thread being restored unaltered.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 11:35:03 am
Literally the post at the start of this thread. You know, the agreement that the admin staff had made to calm all of this down.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 29, 2020, 11:52:16 am
Anyway, both Goober and Sandwich have had their admin privileges removed.

I'll write a proper statement about it later, when I'm not on my phone.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 11:54:38 am
Somewhat ironic that as his last action as admin, Sandwich unilaterally walked back on decisions that were made by a collective.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 29, 2020, 11:59:18 am
Somewhat ironic that as his last action as admin, Sandwich unilaterally walked back on decisions that were made by a collective.

Benevolent dictatorship
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 29, 2020, 12:02:53 pm
Vive la révolution
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 12:06:17 pm
To be absolutely fair, the other side broke it first by de-admining Goober. However, I do not protest what Karajorma just did. I feel with Goober being back as an admin and no one intending to move against him again, it should have still stood. Sandwich did something that made me think it was a sign of things to come, and I don't like where that sign was pointing.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 12:08:23 pm
To be absolutely fair, the other side broke it first by de-admining Goober.

Goober broke it first by not apologizing, surely? :P
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 12:09:25 pm
All's well that ends well.

Now somebody get Axem back, for ****'s sake, all of this was absolutely not worth him leaving.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 12:10:06 pm
I would love Axem to return, but I also respect him too much to try to coax him back in here.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 12:13:45 pm
To be absolutely fair, the other side broke it first by de-admining Goober.

Goober broke it first by not apologizing, surely? :P
He did, but, well, we all know how people feel about it.

Axem should be made to know what happens, we'll see where this goes, as this could easily not be the end of the twists in the tale. If changes are to be made going forward, I would hope his voice would be involved in that.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Goober5000 on October 29, 2020, 12:15:39 pm
Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 12:15:48 pm
I think Axem is the best thing to have happened to this community in years, but I really don't want to push him into coming back. If he looks at the forum, goes "okay this is nice" and then decides to be back, that's great. I wouldn't like to be put in a position where he feels obligated out of a sense of politeness or anything.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 12:16:42 pm
Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.

I am so glad none of us have to care what you think any more. That has been my motivating goal this entire time.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 29, 2020, 12:18:55 pm
Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.

I'll finally make that Scroll cutscene if you can provide a heartfelt, sincere apology.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 12:19:58 pm
Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.

Your lawyers would be proud of you.

Thanks for being one of the primary reasons causing Axem to leave. Bang up job.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 12:24:42 pm
Reminder:
Quote
As far as I'm concerned Goober has been given every chance to apologise for his actions. Instead last week Goober reiterated on the global moderator board that he feels that should the global mods and admins not agree with his definition of defamation he'd feel entitled to look into legal options.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Strygon on October 29, 2020, 12:25:35 pm
The primary reason was that Axem basically achieved everything there is to achieve with FSO. This incident was merely the spark that light a powder keg that was rigged to blow sooner or later anyway.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 12:45:16 pm
Is it done, Yuri?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Rhymes on October 29, 2020, 12:57:51 pm
No, Comrade Premier. It has only begun.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 12:59:36 pm
I sure as **** hope it's done. Been a long time coming.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 29, 2020, 01:03:40 pm
Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.
Even people who were formerly giving you the benefit of the doubt disagree.  Your non-apology turned almost everyone against you.

Your lack of self-awareness and inability to swallow your pride did this.  Proverbs 16:18 ring any bells?  You can either learn from this experience and grow as a person, or you can continue to blame everyone but yourself.

I think we both know which option you'll choose, but I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: spart_n on October 29, 2020, 01:04:22 pm
Thread theme:
 
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 29, 2020, 02:06:41 pm
This thread has been full of historical rewriting since I last posted a few hours ago.

The admins made a deal that was agreed to by Goober, which included proper moderation of the personal attacks in the original thread before restoring it, as well as Goober being curtailed from moderating the forums for at least a year.

The admins then blatantly broke that deal by not moderating the posts in question. They then began (continued, actually) to demand that Goober be de-admined, many of them threatening to quit if not.

In the meantime, I was working with Goober to rewrite his apology, seeing as it only met half the terms dictated by that same agreement the admins were busy breaking.

Little did we know that the other admins were planning in secret whatever they were planning, culminating in Goober being de-admined suddenly, about 24 hours ago. Then, crickets. No follow-up post, no announcement, nothing.

THAT ridiculous mishandling of the situation was the straw that broke Axem's back, and according to his own words, was the direct cause of him leaving.

The sheer hypocrisy and blatant violation of forum guidelines demonstrated by the other admins in all this is unfortunately all I have to leave HLP with. You are at their mercy, but as long as you walk in step and spout the mob rhetoric, you should be fine.

I'm done ranting.

I'm truly saddened to see that it came to this.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 02:07:59 pm
"im not owned" i continue to insist as i slowly shrink and transform into an ex admin
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 02:15:27 pm
We know the agreement, it's in the first post.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Rhymes on October 29, 2020, 02:17:33 pm
bye felicia
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 02:20:23 pm
Well, nice job, 2 Admins less operating an understaffed site, the whole Global Mod group and the remaining admins should be fired due to proven incompetence but a bunch of PolDisc asshats got rid of some people that disagreed on

What a beautiful day for HLP~
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Goober5000 on October 29, 2020, 02:20:47 pm
Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.

I'll finally make that Scroll cutscene if you can provide a heartfelt, sincere apology.

The thing is, I had been composing a heartfelt, sincere apology.  I told the admins on Monday that I was composing it, and I worked on it each day from Monday through Wednesday.  They took these actions without even waiting to see what the new apology looked like.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 02:22:57 pm
You know that you can still apologize, right?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Rhymes on October 29, 2020, 02:25:55 pm
Well, nice job, 2 Admins less operating an understaffed site, the whole Global Mod group and the remaining admins should be fired due to proven incompetence but a bunch of PolDisc asshats got rid of some people that disagreed on

What a beautiful day for HLP~

You've been told repeatedly why the rest of us had a problem with what Goober did and you know damn well that it wasn't just political disagreement. Quit your bull****.

You know that you can still apologize, right?

he's not gonna
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 29, 2020, 02:28:46 pm
Well, nice job, 2 Admins less operating an understaffed site, the whole Global Mod group and the remaining admins should be fired due to proven incompetence but a bunch of PolDisc asshats got rid of some people that disagreed on

What a beautiful day for HLP~

You've been told repeatedly why the rest of us had a problem with what Goober did and you know damn well that it wasn't just political disagreement. Quit your bull****.

No u
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 29, 2020, 02:30:14 pm
Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.

I'll finally make that Scroll cutscene if you can provide a heartfelt, sincere apology.

The thing is, I had been composing a heartfelt, sincere apology.  I told the admins on Monday that I was composing it, and I worked on it each day from Monday through Wednesday.  They took these actions without even waiting to see what the new apology looked like.

Imagine if you'd just done that the first time, rather than needing to be forced into rewriting your non-apology because people saw right through you. 

And apparently, you continued to hint at legal action in the staff forums even afterwards, which is a dead giveaway that you weren't sincere and still don't understand what you did wrong.

One wonders if you would have ever apologized at all if you didn't see it as the price required to keep your admin powers.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 02:30:29 pm
The thing is, I had been composing a heartfelt, sincere apology.  I told the admins on Monday that I was composing it, and I worked on it each day from Monday through Wednesday.  They took these actions without even waiting to see what the new apology looked like.

It might not make a difference to your position as admin, but I would read such an apology with some compassion. I say 'some' because I think it could only be complete if it also included an apology for your call to keep churches open. Given what we knew then—and especially what we now know about how COVID spreads, with just a few large gatherings driving the majority of infection—I think that was tantamount to advocacy for mass death. Worship may be as necessary to the religious as water, but churches aren't.

Yes, it's not the same as calling for violence, because viruses don't have will. But it is in my mind the same as encouraging people to pack into a crowded club with only one exit while the backstage is on fire. I think it is at least as big an issue as threatening to sue a forum member.

I may disagree with you on just about every conceivable axis but I would like to give genuine attempts at communication and redemption a chance.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 02:31:10 pm
Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.

I'll finally make that Scroll cutscene if you can provide a heartfelt, sincere apology.

The thing is, I had been composing a heartfelt, sincere apology.  I told the admins on Monday that I was composing it, and I worked on it each day from Monday through Wednesday.  They took these actions without even waiting to see what the new apology looked like.

No jokes, glibness, or facetiousness, I'd actually like to see that apology.

But not because you are trying to keep your Admin status. An apology that actually shows us that you know what you did was wrong, and are truly remorseful for it. Not keeping up some end of a bargain you consulted your lawyers for, when you were entering a deal to keep your community position.

I'm all for you posting it. Like I'll even say please. Please, if you have crafted it, post it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: mjn.mixael on October 29, 2020, 02:33:20 pm
One wonders if you would have ever apologized at all if you didn't see it as the price required to keep your admin powers.

I've been at odds with him for a decade. The man is incapable of actual remorse or empathy. Relationships are transactional.

This is why I apologize to my kids every time I do them wrong. Apologizing isn't weakness.. it's taking responsibility and taking responsibility is strength. It garners respect and admiration. I want them to see that in practice.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 29, 2020, 02:34:47 pm
I would love to see some apology.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 29, 2020, 02:43:56 pm
Well, nice job, 2 Admins less operating an understaffed site, the whole Global Mod group and the remaining admins should be fired due to proven incompetence but a bunch of PolDisc asshats got rid of some people that disagreed on

What a beautiful day for HLP~

What a sad, yet accurate description of the latest events.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: DefCynodont119 on October 29, 2020, 02:45:20 pm
This entire fiasco is just another one for the "Effed up things that happened in 2020" category. .



I hope to everything that Axem comes back.  :sigh:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 02:48:25 pm
Say what you want about the latest events, but anyone who has some experience, or the long view of things, will know that this was the chemotherapy the board needed.

Yeah, it'll kill your immune system, and that needs to be built back up properly (hopefully the mods and admins will re-organize a bit more efficiently after this fiasco), but the cancer that was killing the host for years is finally gone.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 02:50:11 pm
I would go so far as to say the attitude of "there's no problem, let's not have drama, conflict is bad" is what let things build up to this point.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 29, 2020, 02:53:37 pm
I, too, would like to have Axem back. I've reached out but have no idea if there is any chance.

Now, we have a slightly reduced moderation crew (who have jobs and/or are sleeping) and I see, though have no chance to action, moderation reports popping up.

This entire fiasco has been an enormous hurt within the community, and I am pleading with you all to:

1. Stop gloating.
2.  Stop piling on, and
3.  Be civil.

batts made a pretty good post along those lines a page-ish back (on phone, can't easily check).

If you can't say anything civilly or decently, resist the urge to comment. Otherwise, this thread will get the temporary lock until the remaining staff have the ability to actually moderate it.

Thanks in advance
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 29, 2020, 02:59:59 pm
[...]
Yeah, it'll kill your immune system, and that needs to be built back up properly (hopefully the mods and admins will re-organize a bit more efficiently after this fiasco), but the cancer that was killing the host for years is finally gone.

Nailed it. People assuming this place will be better after this "fiasco", yet proof seems to be lacking. What are we going to get? An improved FSO code? More campaigns? More mods and TCs? Glorious scripts? The only benefit is see here is the supposed reduction of the odds of GD/PD discussions degenerating into something far worse. And it's completely unrelated to the core targets of this community. Also, the staff lost several skilled members and we have no idea who's going to replace them.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 03:08:31 pm
[...]
Yeah, it'll kill your immune system, and that needs to be built back up properly (hopefully the mods and admins will re-organize a bit more efficiently after this fiasco), but the cancer that was killing the host for years is finally gone.

Nailed it. People assuming this place will be better after this "fiasco", yet proof seems to be lacking. What are we going to get? An improved FSO code? More campaigns? More mods and TCs? Glorious scripts? The only benefit is see here is the supposed reduction of the odds of GD/PD discussions degenerating into something far worse. And it's completely unrelated to the core targets of this community. Also, the staff lost several skilled members and we have no idea who's going to replace them.

Yeah, and I agreed with Sandwich. These decisions, while necessary in my opinion, do actually run counter to HLP's ethos, "bringing modders together". This drove competent modders away. Now, the reason for that, sure, you let this fester for years without addressing it, and now it came to bite everyone in the ass.

But there's no denying, this is overall a loss for all of us, even though a part of a longstanding problem was solved.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Luis Dias on October 29, 2020, 03:13:54 pm
I personally hope that the diagnosis of a harmful state of affairs on HLP was correctly made, without error, and that the site may heal in time. From the small things us second-class citizens are allowed to peek, I'm not entirely hopeful, but still pray for it. I sincerely hope you made the right calls, and also hope that all the grudges that may still exist be sufficiently small and die of boredom.

Good luck for all.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 03:21:53 pm
I certainly feel there is more to discuss regarding the future of HLP even if Goober and Sandwich are to remain stripped to the ranks. The talking mustn't end with that. That post from Axem that was put in here was about much more than Goober, and I've never seen him so scathing before. I'm sure serious business went down to make him say that, and we can't just let that lie. Especially if he felt it was so bad as to actually leave rather than simply pull out of the staff.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 03:33:17 pm
Axem judged his fellows harshly, with good reason, but something had to give. It was increasingly evident that there was no way to resolve this with just agreeing to disagree, which is the way things have been resolved for the past fifteen years, leading to this.

It was either going to be HLP led by Goober and Sandwich, or not.

But yes. Some protocols and procedures on how to do things would not be bad to develop. Maybe some kind of a... democratic manner in handling things? Like, when all admins were against two, the result should have been clear. Out you go by democratic process.

But some operated under the auspices they can never do anything wrong, that they were benevolent rules and dictators, and had permanent standing that could never be questioned.

Maybe change some things.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Zacam on October 29, 2020, 04:25:22 pm
In concurrence with MP-Ryan:

There is nothing to gloat about. Retaining civility is still key.

I'm personally of the opinion that this thread is no longer necessary for open discussion -as defined by the topic-; but I'll await the feedback of others for a consensus.

I get that this is still something that is of viable conversation; especially going forward.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 29, 2020, 04:34:47 pm
There's gonna be a statement from Karajorma though. I think we should have the opportunity to respond to that. Unless he wants to open up a new thread with it instead.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on October 29, 2020, 04:38:33 pm
Just finished a 350 mile drive.

FFS...... Axem.....
F :sigh:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 29, 2020, 04:43:19 pm
Yeah, it's probably best to be done with this thread. I think we beat this horse to death.

Karajorma can open a new one with the statement about things proceeding forward. Maybe the community can give some input on that, and then you guys can take the community feedback, and behind closed doors, decide what you think might be best to do as we all move on from this.

Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 29, 2020, 04:49:12 pm
Sure, this thread can go, it "served" its "purpose". What a sad day for the FreeSpace community.  :(
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 04:56:14 pm
This was a good thing for FreeSpace, and a rare win for 'doing the right thing' over 'sitting on our hands and fretting about civility'.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Assassin714 on October 29, 2020, 05:10:25 pm
I'd offer to be a mod and help pick up the slack, but I don't have enough time to commit.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Strygon on October 29, 2020, 05:13:28 pm
I'd similarly also offer my services wherever I can, though my knowledge with web coding is rather... limited. I do have a lot of time to sift through many many posts at least (since I always have HLP open on a tab nearby)
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 29, 2020, 05:18:20 pm
This was a good thing for FreeSpace, and a rare win for 'doing the right thing' over 'sitting on our hands and fretting about civility'.

I beg to differ.

All arguments in favor of this being a good thing for FreeSpace modding are merely conjectural and driven by emotions. Those like me who think the opposite just happened are providing actual proof that it's bad. The staff's down three active members, for instance, and we have no idea who's going to replace them; this is going to have direct consequences on the way the site is managed (where by site I mean HLP as a whole, not the GD/PD trash).
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 29, 2020, 06:21:08 pm
Please, Mobius, I am asking you sincerely, stop trying to argue to everyone who wanted this outcome that they've ruined the site. Apart from anything else it's the last thing the staff need to deal with right now. The best thing for modding on this site right now is for members to take constructive steps to fix the damage left after this whole sorry affair.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 29, 2020, 07:25:50 pm
These are legitimate questions that address the core of the issue and - you know - they may have their answer.

We've got community members over here saying that the right thing has been done for HLP and the FreeSpace community as a whole. Please come forward and explain, I'm all ears. As of today, my fact-checking tool is getting opposite results.

Time will tell.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: EatThePath on October 29, 2020, 08:34:37 pm
I said something like this over on discord in response to similar statements, but I'll say it again here.

Mobius, the good supposed by advocates of removal is the reduction of a negative influence on forum culture and a salvaging of the credibility of the running of the forum in the eyes of those who saw it as deeply tarnished. Any benefit going forward is in a better forum environment than would have been had otherwise, which between being a very subjective, nebulous thing and being a future outcome compared to an alternate possible future outcome we will never see, is practically impossible to measure ever and doubly impossible to measure now.

If you want to tell me how people could measure that, then go right ahead, but otherwise all you're doing is casting shade and stirring the pot without any constructive use. The best analogy I can think if is that you're going to someone immediately after a bad breakup, demanding they prove that they're going to be happier in a year and pointing to all the skills of their ex they don't have access to as objective proof they're going to have to offset.

You clearly think this all was unproportional, unjustified, mishandled and counterproductive, and I think it's fair to make that known. By instead staking your claim on a moral high ground by claiming objectivity and lording it over the people who disagree, I don't see how you expect to accomplish anything but irritating people.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nyctaeus on October 29, 2020, 10:52:40 pm
I think that everything we, as community just displayed, is lack of understanding, common sense, capability to calm down and state our merits in cultural discussion. We as community displayed, that we make decisions driven by hysteria, accusations, threats and chaos.

What many people see and PM me about is drama. People are afraid about future of promising projects, functioning community they are attached to and the game they love. This is no ****ing victory, because there was never enemy to fight against... Unless one is crazy about politics. I think Goob made one step too far. But others made just another step instead of stepping down and get calm. The guy who contributed insane amount of content and helped many people deserved for fair verdict, but instead he just got ****ing demonified. Actually Axem and MP-Ryan are the only ones who actually did a good job there, keeping cool heads.

Just look what you guys have done. You all just generated one of the worst drama that ever happened in this community. The one that people will remember for years. I hear people really afraid if this is an end of HLP. And you call this a ****ing victory...

I've made countless assets not only because I love the game with my whole heart, but also because I want to support great people on their modding endeavours. Now I'm really confused and unsure, if I make all this stuff for people who are really dedicated to keep the game alive and kicking, or just a bunch of infantile screamers who are unable to talk and find an understanding like adults. And I am really unsure, if I want to stay here.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Aesaar on October 29, 2020, 11:05:22 pm
I'm just going to remind everyone lamenting the loss of Sandwich and Goober as staff that there were other members of staff who intended to resign if Goober remained an admin (The_E and Mongoose stated so earlier, and Karajorma was apparently strongly considering it too).  Any notion that the status quo could have been maintained in the face of Goober's lack of remorse is utterly laughable.

It sucks, but a compromise had been reached.  All Goober had to do was swallow his pride and make a sincere apology.  This was apparently beyond him.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 29, 2020, 11:06:30 pm
Feelings are really raw for everyone right now; I'd like to suggest that everyone take some time to think things over, take a break, and calm down before making any pronouncements or decisions. We've apparently lost one major contributor over this already and had two others who have provided substantial technical support  and content over the years removed from those roles. This doesn't include those who have left in years past due to hard feelings either.

We're a small group united by enjoyment of an elderly game and the fantastic new things our community has made from it. It's going to be tough for a little while, but hopefully we can come out of this with a better set up for the future. It would be a terrible shame to lose anything or anyone more over this.

Everyone, no matter what your feelings on this, take a deep breath and a short break if you need to. The lights are staying on.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 29, 2020, 11:34:15 pm
Can I post the geek social fallacies? You're allowed to say no
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 30, 2020, 03:20:52 am
It seems like a reasonable idea. I just had a look through them myself.

For anyone joining us this late, both Sandwich and Goober have been demoted from their administration roles but are still members on this board. It does appear as though other moderators and the board in general has come to terms with what happened so I don't know if a post summing up things is really required. Is there anything that actually needs to be addressed? I mean actually is needed rather than a desire to gossip about what happened?

So instead I'd like to post a thread asking about the future of HLP. I'm still writing on it even as I work on this one.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 30, 2020, 03:25:45 am
I think it would help to just have a summation of events from a person we can trust, rather then the whole mixed-messaging-over-several-pages-of-arguments-where-it-was-obvious-that-some-people-were-operating-on-entirely-different-standards-as-everyone-else.

Mabye include it in the new thread instead.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on October 30, 2020, 04:19:56 am
One of the problems with doing that is that I doubt anyone knows the full story. Apart from Axem's post, I've heard nothing more on why he left.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 30, 2020, 04:31:57 am
From what I gathered from what others have said, and his post, he was on his way out anyway, and what pushed him over the edge to fully commit to leaving was the absolute state of inability to deal with serious issues in the private admin forum, and what said members had to resort to in order to get things done.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 30, 2020, 04:39:13 am
One of the problems with doing that is that I doubt anyone knows the full story. Apart from Axem's post, I've heard nothing more on why he left.

It's not neccesary for you to think about what Axem's motivations were beyond to just make a single post that sums up several threads and two dozen pages.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 30, 2020, 04:55:49 am
I think it would help to just have a summation of events from a person we can trust, rather then the whole mixed-messaging-over-several-pages-of-arguments-where-it-was-obvious-that-some-people-were-operating-on-entirely-different-standards-as-everyone-else.

Mabye include it in the new thread instead.

Seeing the new thread, a summation of events has no place there. However, I've raised the idea with the staff.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 30, 2020, 05:39:40 am
It sucks, but a compromise had been reached.  All Goober had to do was swallow his pride and make a sincere apology.  This was apparently beyond him.

I was going to post a rebuttal to this, but instead, kara at least has agreed that the staff should try to write a summation of events for the community. Hopefully that will both answer a lot of your questions, correct any mistaken assumptions or misunderstandings, and clarify exactly what happened. :yes:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 30, 2020, 01:29:23 pm
The Geek Social Fallacies (http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html)

Quote
Geek Social Fallacy #1: Ostracizers Are Evil
GSF1 is one of the most common fallacies, and one of the most deeply held. Many geeks have had horrible, humiliating, and formative experiences with ostracism, and the notion of being on the other side of the transaction is repugnant to them.

In its non-pathological form, GSF1 is benign, and even commendable: it is long past time we all grew up and stopped with the junior high popularity games. However, in its pathological form, GSF1 prevents its carrier from participating in -- or tolerating -- the exclusion of anyone from anything, be it a party, a comic book store, or a web forum, and no matter how obnoxious, offensive, or aromatic the prospective excludee may be.

As a result, nearly every geek social group of significant size has at least one member that 80% of the members hate, and the remaining 20% merely tolerate. If GSF1 exists in sufficient concentration -- and it usually does -- it is impossible to expel a person who actively detracts from every social event. GSF1 protocol permits you not to invite someone you don't like to a given event, but if someone spills the beans and our hypothetical Cat Piss Man invites himself, there is no recourse. You must put up with him, or you will be an Evil Ostracizer and might as well go out for the football team.

This phenomenon has a number of unpleasant consequences. For one thing, it actively hinders the wider acceptance of geek-related activities: I don't know that RPGs and comics would be more popular if there were fewer trolls who smell of cheese hassling the new blood, but I'm sure it couldn't hurt. For another, when nothing smacking of social selectiveness can be discussed in public, people inevitably begin to organize activities in secret. These conspiracies often lead to more problems down the line, and the end result is as juvenile as anything a seventh-grader ever dreamed of.

Geek Social Fallacy #2: Friends Accept Me As I Am
The origins of GSF2 are closely allied to the origins of GSF1. After being victimized by social exclusion, many geeks experience their "tribe" as a non-judgmental haven where they can take refuge from the cruel world outside.

This seems straightforward and reasonable. It's important for people to have a space where they feel safe and accepted. Ideally, everyone's social group would be a safe haven. When people who rely too heavily upon that refuge feel insecure in that haven, however, a commendable ideal mutates into its pathological form, GSF2.

Carriers of GSF2 believe that since a friend accepts them as they are, anyone who criticizes them is not their friend. Thus, they can't take criticism from friends -- criticism is experienced as a treacherous betrayal of the friendship, no matter how inappropriate the criticized behavior may be.

Conversely, most carriers will never criticize a friend under any circumstances; the duty to be supportive trumps any impulse to point out unacceptable behavior.

GSF2 has extensive consequences within a group. Its presence in substantial quantity within a social group vastly increases the group's conflict-averseness. People spend hours debating how to deal with conflicts, because they know (or sometimes merely fear) that the other person involved is a GSF2 carrier, and any attempt to confront them directly will only make things worse. As a result, people let grudges brew much longer than is healthy, and they spend absurd amounts of time deconstructing their interpersonal dramas in search of a back way out of a dilemma.

Ironically, GSF2 carriers often take criticism from coworkers, supervisors, and mentors quite well; those individuals aren't friends, and aren't expected to accept the carrier unconditionally.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jr2 on October 30, 2020, 01:35:36 pm
Goober and myself, but by actions that everyone "else" took as well.

So it's you two vs everyone else hmmm?

No, pretty sure the rest of us are either gone already or too smart to get involved with situations like this.  Stick to the gaming and modding aspects, tell mjn his cutscenes are awesome, don't go into the vents, cause something worse than Carl has been breeding there for for the past 8 or so years.

Those who rejected my apology broke it first.  I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.

I'll finally make that Scroll cutscene if you can provide a heartfelt, sincere apology.

The thing is, I had been composing a heartfelt, sincere apology.  I told the admins on Monday that I was composing it, and I worked on it each day from Monday through Wednesday.  They took these actions without even waiting to see what the new apology looked like.

Heartfelt, sincere apologies should only be given if they are called for, and if they are called for, should be given regardless of actions on the other side.  If you feel you should have given an apology, you should give it regardless of any agreement or the breaking of said agreement.  Do your part, and don't read the replies until you're in a mental state to take them, cause they aren't going to be nice, save for maybe one or two, and that's being generous.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 30, 2020, 01:42:01 pm
No, pretty sure the rest of us are either gone already or too smart to get involved with situations like this.  Stick to the gaming and modding aspects, tell mjn his cutscenes are awesome, don't go into the vents, cause something worse than Carl has been breeding there for for the past 8 or so years.

Point of order: My hmmmm specifically referred to people on the staff.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: jr2 on October 30, 2020, 01:43:12 pm
No, pretty sure the rest of us are either gone already or too smart to get involved with situations like this.  Stick to the gaming and modding aspects, tell mjn his cutscenes are awesome, don't go into the vents, cause something worse than Carl has been breeding there for for the past 8 or so years.

Point of order: My hmmmm specifically referred to people on the staff.

Ah, ok, never mind then.  I think Sandwich was talking about the thread that started this all and the community, not just the staff, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: CT27 on October 30, 2020, 08:13:23 pm
This is the first time I've waded into this Goober situation here.


I'll just say this for now:  Goober, like others have suggested, I would advise posting that new apology when you get it written out.  Like jr2 said recently, if you wrote a truly heartfelt and sincere apology then you felt something needed to be said on your part regardless of how you perceive actions of other people.  Others (even Battuta) said they would want to see it and be willing to give it a chance.


At the least, what could it hurt?



Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 30, 2020, 08:40:05 pm
I was going to post a rebuttal to this, but instead, kara at least has agreed that the staff should try to write a summation of events for the community. Hopefully that will both answer a lot of your questions, correct any mistaken assumptions or misunderstandings, and clarify exactly what happened. :yes:

I am highly interested in hearing this.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 31, 2020, 04:46:51 am
Yeah, I think more details would be helpful and interesting.  :yes:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 31, 2020, 04:59:24 am
So, in the interest of fairness with the summary of what all happened, the staff are working on a collaborative document (a shared Google Docs) to write the summary. We've agreed to keep debating out of it and stick to facts as much as possible. I'm hopeful that we can actually hammer out something that objectively presents what happened & when. However, I don't think it will happen quickly. If it gets completed within a week, I'd be shocked.

My question for you all is, do you want a summary of just what happened behind the closed doors of the GlobMod board, or do you also want us to integrate what was happening at the time in the PolDisc thread? I'm guessing the latter, since that is the context for everything, and PolDisc isn't precisely open to all unless you've asked for access... let us know.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 31, 2020, 05:13:01 am
Sure, why not.  :)

Just to clarify, me (and possibly Nightmare, as well as many others) don't want this as an excuse to trigger further debates, flames and offenses. It's just a matter of "data-transparency" and finding out what happened. Simple and clean.  :yes:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 31, 2020, 05:43:51 am
I would say as much as possible, internal and external.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 31, 2020, 07:32:07 am
Just to clarify, me (and possibly Nightmare, as well as many others) don't want this as an excuse to trigger further debates, flames and offenses. It's just a matter of "data-transparency" and finding out what happened. Simple and clean.  :yes:

Yep :yes:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 31, 2020, 11:49:20 am
So, in the interest of fairness with the summary of what all happened, the staff are working on a collaborative document (a shared Google Docs) to write the summary. We've agreed to keep debating out of it and stick to facts as much as possible.

Who's 'we'? You're not staff any more.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 31, 2020, 11:54:10 am
So, in the interest of fairness with the summary of what all happened, the staff are working on a collaborative document (a shared Google Docs) to write the summary. We've agreed to keep debating out of it and stick to facts as much as possible.

Who's 'we'? You're not staff any more.

Until recently, "we" was just karajorma and myself, since nobody else had chimed in. But now, Mongoose has, and he's staunchly opposed to the idea. So it may not happen after all. It's not my call, sorry.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 31, 2020, 11:58:59 am
So, in the interest of fairness with the summary of what all happened, the staff are working on a collaborative document (a shared Google Docs) to write the summary. We've agreed to keep debating out of it and stick to facts as much as possible.

Who's 'we'? You're not staff any more.

Until recently, "we" was just karajorma and myself, since nobody else had chimed in. But now, Mongoose has, and he's staunchly opposed to the idea. So it may not happen after all. It's not my call, sorry.
I do think you should be involved. As the only one who opposed the others, your story should be told. Your presence adds legitimacy, instead of just history being written by the victors.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 31, 2020, 12:12:31 pm
I agree.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 31, 2020, 12:21:16 pm
I should probably have been more precise in my wording. I had suggested that, in the interest of saving time and avoiding conflict over writing the shared doc, that an alternative might be just to lock the entire thread where things unfolded (in GlobalMods), and move it somewhere publicly accessible. That was the aspect Mongoose was staunchly opposed to, reasoning that it would just inflame things again.

On a more general level, he appears to be somewhat less opposed to recounting the tale as a summary, but I should not have termed that opposition as "staunchly opposed". It's more of a case where he doesn't see anything to gain by it, and thinks enough information has been posted that you can piece things together yourselves.

tl;dr: Making GlobMod thread public: no; composing summary document: perhaps.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 31, 2020, 12:41:28 pm
It would be a big step towards transparency to let us see the thread. And sure, I imagine people aren't going to be shown in a good light, but it would make a statement to move it into Site Support. You might even get some constructive, useful feedback on it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 31, 2020, 12:48:44 pm
It would be a big step towards transparency to let us see the thread. And sure, I imagine people aren't going to be shown in a good light, but it would make a statement to move it into Site Support. You might even get some constructive, useful feedback on it.

I'm certainly in favor of that. Parts of the thread have been made public, the rest was made put out as hearsay. So before more time is being wasted with debates on what happened, it could be just made public.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Lorric on October 31, 2020, 12:56:36 pm
It would be a big step towards transparency to let us see the thread. And sure, I imagine people aren't going to be shown in a good light, but it would make a statement to move it into Site Support. You might even get some constructive, useful feedback on it.

I'm certainly in favor of that. Parts of the thread have been made public, the rest was made put out as hearsay. So before more time is being wasted with debates on what happened, it could be just made public.
Put some fresh eyes on it. Maybe we'll see things you can't, both from the perspective of it always being the same staff, and that you were right in the thick of it while we can look on it from the outside as neutrals.

Be brave, and open yourselves up to scrutiny.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on October 31, 2020, 01:06:57 pm
The thread will absolutely not be made public, if only because Axem is a significant participant and is no longer present to consent.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 31, 2020, 01:50:06 pm
I do agree that the thread can't be made public, but a description of its content - written by both sides - would definitely make up for it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Grizzly on October 31, 2020, 02:02:10 pm
The few bits of the thread that have been made public have also been published without consent from the people involved and in the service of "winning" a petty, after the fact argument.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mito [PL] on October 31, 2020, 02:14:03 pm
It's hard to call it "after the fact" when the decision made can be easily reversed... Even if Axem's departure cannot.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on October 31, 2020, 02:45:05 pm
Is this really necessary?

I have no problems assuming the worst about everyone. That everyone behaved abhorrently, rushed things (a month to deal with this, so "rushed" is relative, but whatever), secret rooms, cloak and dagger stories. Backstabbing. Horrible behavior.

Who cares?

We get it. You had no function to affect change at the admin level for decades. You got desperate because you had years of bad things accumulating, and you did things outside the rules (there do not seem to have been rules for admins dealing with admins though) to enact what you thought was right.

Everyone's a terrible human being, and yet things needed to get done.

The End.

I would not care even if it went the other way. My original presumption was that everyone would quit, sans Sandwich and Goober, and they'd run HLP forever from then on. I'd be fine with that too, and would not need a history then either. I'd just assume the above all the same, and that would be sufficient.

That said, whatever floats your boats. Maybe it's good to do this for the sake of catharsis or something.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Phantom Hoover on October 31, 2020, 03:32:56 pm
I'm really with BlackDove on this one, there's very little that can be gained by relitigating whatever horrible dramatic mess went down in the internal discussions.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mongoose on October 31, 2020, 03:33:28 pm
Just to make things perfectly clear, my opinions re: the above were not intended for public consumption, and I did not authorize Sandwich to speak on my behalf.   Like BD and PH said, my main concern is what's best for the community going forward. I'm in favor of a broad disclosure of how events progressed, but I don't see how anything good can come out of a hyper-detailed tit-for-tat.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: General Battuta on October 31, 2020, 03:42:03 pm
Sandwich? More like Bannedwich
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Nightmare on October 31, 2020, 04:16:07 pm
Sandwich? More like Bannedwich

Thanks to the hard work of rev_posix and Sandwich, the HLP email system has been fixed!  All registration emails from the past few months have been re-sent.  If you still need help, please sign on to Discord and let us know.  The Discord link can be found in the top navbar under the HLP menu. ヾ(´︶`♡)ノ
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on October 31, 2020, 04:19:53 pm
Enough with this "character killing". Even if they got demoted, the former admins have done and are still doing a lot for this community.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on October 31, 2020, 05:33:11 pm
Just to make things perfectly clear, my opinions re: the above were not intended for public consumption, and I did not authorize Sandwich to speak on my behalf.

In that case, I would like to publicly apologize for doing so, Mongoose. I am sorry for posting in public an abstract of what you voiced in private. :blah:
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mongoose on October 31, 2020, 06:04:29 pm
Thanks, I appreciate that.  :) I don't mind sharing my opinions about what form this should take, I'd just rather be the one to share them myself.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: karajorma on November 02, 2020, 06:21:08 am
As promised, here's what happened.

1.  A PolDisc thread got out of hand and there were what can be interpreted as personal attacks.  That situation escalated, resulting in a moderator report.  Following contentious discussion on the GM board, this resulted in Axem's public judgement that what transpired was not generally actionable to any of the parties involved, and he left an open-ended request for Goober5000 to determine how to to handle his vague legal threat in the eyes of the community.

2.  Goober deleted the thread and left a select few posts.  This caused immediate outrage among a majority of the staff.  Goober steadfastly has claimed that the statements in the PolDisc thread were personal attacks and defamatory, although he did later state that he did not intend to seek legal action.  We have a clear principle of not invoking moderation powers in a dispute in which we are involved, which will be further reinforced in the coming weeks and months.

3.  During these events, a private Discord group was created to discuss matters in real-time.  To the knowledge of every staff member participating in it who is still posting on HLP, this invitation included all currently responding staff except Goober due to the nature of what had transpired and the possibility of disciplinary action against him.  We have subsequently discovered that Sandwich either was not sent an invitation, never received it, or did not see it and accept; the end result is that the group did not ultimately include Sandwich in the discord discussions.  This was through no malice or intent of the participants to exclude him; Goober's participation was intentionally excluded as his behaviour was the matter of review and remaining staff needed a channel to determine the best path forward.  This approach is normal in all disciplinary contexts in private and government organizations.

4.  A majority of staff initially called for a complete removal of Goober's moderation powers.  Subsequently, a detailed compromise was reached, and partially implemented.  That compromise broke down in the face of community reaction, an insufficient public apology by Goober, and contention over how the thread in PolDisc was to be handled based on the compromise.  It is fair to say that all parties went into the compromise with inadequate preparation for how it needed to be actually implemented, which led to further breakdown.  For that, we all owe the community an apology.

5.  A more than 2/3 majority of active staff determined they believed Goober was not going to properly apologize and that his judgement could not longer be trusted, and declared within the GM board that he needed to be removed.  Privately, those staff drafted basic contingency plans to remove Goober as an administrator which were to include a public statement and some personal messages to both Goober and Sandwich.  Unfortunately, when the vote was tallied in the thread, the removal was undertaken without the public statement OR the private messages.  Understandably, Sandwich and Goober were outraged, Axem got completely disgusted with the entire situation and left, and more conflict resulted.  We owe Goober, Sandwich, and the community at large another apology for that failure of coordination.  We especially owe Axem a public apology, which we recognize he may never read, for this failure in our collective ability to resolve this situation quickly and efficiently was clearly - based on his final post - a catalyst for his departure and is a loss to the whole community.

6.  Sandwich undertook further unilateral actions in the face of what he believed were staff members going rogue.  The remaining staff made it clear that this was a planned majority decision, clearly expressed in the GM board, that was executed poorly.  We have since learned that Sandwich was privately assisting Goober in the drafting of a second attempt at an apology.  We have to be clear, however, that Goober's admin status removal was a collective decision made by a large majority of the staff who concurred that they would resign in protest if it was not completed.  We do hope Goober continues on as a productive member of the community as he has provided significant contributions to HLP over his many years here.  Sandwich did not resign but did agree to have his status reduced to the Aide-de-Camp role, and continues to provide input to the community as well.

Staff participants in the entire situation, start to finish, are (alphabetically):

-Axem (resigned)
-Fineus (Active)
-Goober (status revoked)
-karajorma (Active)
-Mongoose (Active)
-MP-Ryan (Active)
-Sandwich (Role change to ADC)
-The E (Active)
-Zacam (Active)

The past few weeks have been contentious and difficult for everyone involved and have frankly done considerable damage to HLP's regular userbase and staff.  All staff members had a role in creating these problems, and all of us directly apologize to the entire board for the conflict this has created.  We hope this resolution will not lead to the loss of more members of the community.  None of these decisions were undertaken lightly, and we recognize the need to reform the way HLP is administered and moderated.  We have already begun to take steps to address these concerns, and welcome the constructive feedback being provided in Site Support.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on November 02, 2020, 06:59:34 am
Since Goober and I were on the "other" side of things from the rest of the staff, I'll just affirm here that this is a reasonably balanced summary of events that encompassed the original thread in PolDisc and the not-publicly-accessible 9.5-page thread in GlobMod.

It does not go much into motivations, reasonings, or the like, nor should it.

Thanks to MP-Ryan for composing the bulk of this (AFAIK), and karajorma for being willing to try posting a summary in the first place.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: EatThePath on November 02, 2020, 09:26:38 am
I appreciate that post, even having followed these events and discussion of them fairly closely it was illuminating in a few ways. I'm glad as well to have Sandwich's endorsement of its accuracy. My only comment is that this summary should probably be more visible, either pinned in this section for a time or edited into the first post in this thread, or something. We still have a trickle of people stumbling into this situation without complete context and reacting before getting a grasp of the whole thing, and making it more likely for this post to be among the first things they see would help. I could understand not wanting to draw more attention to the drama than it already has, but I think that ship has probably sailed.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Luis Dias on November 02, 2020, 09:36:09 am
Thank you, Karajorma and everyone involved in writing that. It is truly informative.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: BlackDove on November 02, 2020, 09:38:53 am
Yeah, you might want to make that more visible by making it its own thread or stickying it.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Galemp on November 02, 2020, 12:55:17 pm
Agreed. This post might be made into its own thread for those (like myself) who avoid PolDisc and are out of the loop, and just want to play with spaceships. Significant contributors walking away from a community this small is deeply significant.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Mobius on November 02, 2020, 01:26:18 pm
Thanks for sharing.


I do read between the lines however that some of the admins did not formally take an active part in the discussion. rev_posix and ngld, at least. We've got Global Moderators who didn't participate, either (Black Wolf and Unknown Target, though the former hasn't been active in months). Considering the numbers involved, in a hypothetical scenario where the above mentioned staff members were sided with Goober and Sandwich, the staff would have not come to the same conclusions so easily. Or, at least, not with the net 2/3 margin mentioned in karajorma's post.

This raises another question: is it possible for a staff member not to choose a side in votes of critical importance such as this one? How should that be interpreted? Isn't the majority normally calculated by taking the total number of staff members into account?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on November 02, 2020, 01:56:44 pm
We actively tried to reach everyone we could and input opportunity has been available for a month. Unlike an actual governing body we can't insist people log in or provide comment and were forced to work with what we have.  If decisions were based on majority of input from total staff rather than staff that comment, HLP would be permanently frozen. And yes, this contributes to the very valid criticism that there should be some requirement of activity to remain on staff in the first place.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Durandal on November 02, 2020, 02:09:53 pm
I want to start off my post here by saying that I apologize for making all of you continue to live, and relive, this current disaster. I'd been out of the loop for the past couple of weeks however and given the people involved here, I've got some words to say, and I can't rest easy not having said them. It is also going to be long, and I ask that you please try to bear with me until the end.

Like most of you, I am a leftist. I'm not terribly well versed in Goob's politics but I am aware that they tend to be on the other end of the spectrum. But HLP is not about politics for me, it is about space pixels.

I joined HLP in 2006 or 2007 as an edgy, isolated teenager amped up on American middle school propaganda history and yearning for a sense of duty and camaraderie. I saw good and evil everywhere and was big on the GenDisc conspiracy theory bandwagon, generally had a complete distrust of authority, and this was only amplified by the irony that Sandwich's "benevolent dictatorship" rhetoric was not considered outrageous or uncouth back in the day - it was par for the course for the site's administration at the time.

With this in mind, I made a pretty big ass out of myself, and in a community that seemed to be run by an imposing, monolithic group of others, I distinctly remember that it was Goober who was the one who actually took the time to talk with me. Who made himself available for dialogue, and generally tried to steer me in the right direction in a sea of folks who (probably rightfully) trolled me into oblivion. I even managed to get myself monkey'd, on a forum that's always been lax on the disciplinary side even in jest.

I returned on and off for awhile, but didn't seriously pick up FS modding and properly start teaching myself to FRED up until the past couple of years. Gone were the days of conspiracy theories and everything a fight to win, but one aspect remained - HLP did still largely seem to be an imposing meritocracy, and the people who knew their way around FSO's inner workings seemed unapproachable or irritable to me most of the time. Having just resigned from a four year developer/staff tenure at another gaming community, I definitely understood it. But it was still disheartening.

Re-enter Goober, and enter Axem.

Over the past year I relied on these two more than any other community members for support. People who were masters of their craft, approachable, and humble. People who didn't make me feel small, or unwelcome, or in over my head. People who didn't make me feel like an other, and provided all the resources I needed to become a proficient modder of FSO in my own right.

I returned to find them gone after attempting to drop Axem a message in private and finding I could not, as I no longer shared a server with him. That was my introduction to this, and yeah, it hurt.

As a community leader not all that long ago myself, yes, unequivocally I would have called for and pursued disciplinary action against a staff member making implied legal threats against community members. However, I think a fact lost on everyone here is that Goober, for all his responsibility and "power" here, never ceased to be a person. I find the measures undertaken by the staff to be inadequate and messy, but not in the way many others saw fit to call them out on.

There's a report button and Goober should have used it, but does his lack of a measured response befitting his role abdicate Mjn - an esteemed senior member of the community - of the accusations against him? Are we free to apply labels here to others in this forum which would, in the real world, see us potentially fired from workplaces, and ostracized by family and friends?

Another angle worth considering here is that we have all had an incredibly trying year - particularly here in the United States - and likely the most difficult of many of our lifetimes. Tensions are running incredibly high between covid, ongoing protests, and imminent elections. Should perhaps, then, some degree of leeway and understanding (I think the proposed second chance in Axem's original post was exemplary here) be extended to both Mjn and Goober? It appears that this line of thought might have been applied to one party here, but not the other.

Lastly, I can't express my disappointment enough that Sandwich was left in the dark on this, and that the ensuing confusion resulted in the loss of Axem. I think I speak for a great many when I say that that man was an infallible pillar of this community, and that we are all much poorer for the loss of him. It may not be what happened, but it's easy from an outsider perspective to read this as HLP's administration caving to a might-makes-right attitude of doubling down harder on Goober after the community called for his removal, and a convenient exclusion of staff members from discussion that may have been more sympathetic to him. Again, I don't necessarily believe this is what transpired, and I'm willing to extend some benefit of the doubt, but nobody should be under any illusion that those are not the optics on it.

Mistakes were made, and given everything I shared above, I'm not sure that the apology made is one I personally can accept at this time. I'm too invested here in certain projects to dip out now, and while I hope for some semblance of a return to normalcy, these are lasting wounds. I don't think any of us could blame Axem for not returning, or Goober for or Sandwich for leaving as well.

If I have any closing thoughts here, it would be that I have concerns about the state of HLP's staff as a bit of an echochamber, and if there is any decision that could be made which would be reassuring, it would be the hiring of new staff members who, while perhaps not as confrontational as Goober, march to the beat of their own drum.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Colonol Dekker on November 02, 2020, 03:03:36 pm
I wasn't involved but then, am I a real mod?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: Sandwich on November 02, 2020, 04:00:20 pm
Durandal, thanks for your input. I'd like to point out that the "echo chamber" that you and others have mentioned (myself included) is really only relevant with regard to the off-topic areas, in particular PolDisc.

When it comes to the core values of HLP, being to make awesome games (or make games awesome, take your pick), I don't think anybody's political or economic views matter too much. :)

I live in Israel. Native-born here are called "Sabras", after the cactus fruit; prickly on the outside, but sweet on the inside. The culture and people here can be "rough and tumble", with a very direct, in-your-face approach... until you get to know them. People will... loudly debate with (i.e. yell at) each other over something or another, and then go grab a cuppa - no hard feelings.

I feel like HLP is - or at least should be - the same way. Even if I get into a heated debate with someone in PolDisc, I'd have no problem turning right around and working with them on a mod, site issue, or whatever.

So yes, while diversity is typically a good thing to have, and while HLP may have less diversity among its staff now than it did before, I would expect and hope that that's not something that would affect the core purpose of the site.
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: CT27 on November 02, 2020, 05:36:21 pm
From what I've heard, Goober5000 was helpful in getting this site back online after the ~couple weeks outage that happened about a couple months ago.

Is he still allowed to help with the site on technical issues should they arise...would his help be accepted?
Title: Re: Regarding Goober5000 & Moderation in Political Discussion
Post by: MP-Ryan on November 02, 2020, 06:29:49 pm
From what I've heard, Goober5000 was helpful in getting this site back online after the ~couple weeks outage that happened about a couple months ago.

Is he still allowed to help with the site on technical issues should they arise...would his help be accepted?

Goober's technical assistance was never at issue and has always been, and hopefully will continue to be, helpful.