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.
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?
Historically, Phantom Hoover got bans from Gendisc/PolDisc for a lot less.
There has absolutely been a theme in this process of non-administrator, non-moderator users being treated as second class citizens.
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.
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.
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.
To the HLP Community,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.
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.
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.
Could someone please explain to me what happened? What did he say and do that was so bad?
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.
He got accused of being a white supremacist because he supports Trump by multiple people.
It's gaslighting, hitting him with the most uncharitable possible interpretation.
Where is he? I see a lot of perspectives here, except for Goober's.
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?
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?
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.
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!
You know, fun thing about that snippet that you kept around for 6 years.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!
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.
I don't see how these things from 6 years ago apply to the current discussion.Read back to see how we got here.
I don't see how these things from 6 years ago apply to the current discussion.
Here comes the defence from the clique!
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.Because Goober wasn't the only one who was wrong. Otherwise it would be done.
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.
what we are dealing with here is abuse of power by an admin threatening legal action against members.
Because Goober wasn't the only one who was wrong. Otherwise it would be done.
To quote a man who has worked with Goober for many years: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.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.
I never saw it that way. And he may have deleted the thread, but he never banned anyone.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.
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.
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.
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.
Even if Goober is worse, that doesn't magically absolve the others.
White supremacist, remember? Personal attack.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.No, we said he supported white supremacists. Because he supports Trump, who is a white supremacist.
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.
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.
If that option existed, yes. It doesn't.
This is defamation and libel, which is grounds for legal action. Retract it.
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?
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.
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".
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.
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
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.
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.
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, 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.
This isn't what happened at all. Gab refused to remove the posts in question. Gab's host forced Gab to remove them.
6. Goober5000 will be separately posting an apology to the community regarding his actions in particular.
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.
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.
my complaint is: is the word 'cunnilingus' so obscene that it needs to be edited out of posts?
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.
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.
...Seth, do not make me regret answering this question.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
...what we are dealing with here is abuse of power by an admin threatening legal action against members...
There is no reason whatsoever for that thread to remain deleted long after every other admin has acknowledged that its deletion was totally illegitimate.
benevolent dictators
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.
Bringing modders together unless an admin makes bizarre legal threats then those modders are free to leave.TMI still don't see the point why some fire from the PolDisc dumpster should burn down HLP.
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 "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)_/¯
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
...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.
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.
A description that something "is grounds for legal action" is not the same as a threat to actually take that action.
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 discussionDidn't Sandwich actually do quite some working on the website recently?
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. :)
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?[/mobius]
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.
Guys you had ****ing three weeks to discuss this internally.
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.
None of your big-wall-of-text-that-says-surprisingly-little...
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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've been at odds with him for a decade. The man is incapable of actual remorse or empathy. Relationships are transactional.
Well at the very least let the man see the last developments on this thread.
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.
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.
-snip-
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.
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?
This is where the fun begins.
This is where the fun begins.
Game Time Started. Our dichotomy opens the combat. (https://youtu.be/XziLNeFm1ok?t=225)
*stuff*
I am also not being glib. I am genuinely curious as to what goes here on HLP discussion wise.
I think the forums behaviour policy should be in quicklinks as I couldn't find it.
*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?
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.
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:
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.
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...
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?
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:
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.
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.
...the thread was put back a day or two ago.:)
...the thread was put back a day or two ago.:)
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.
[...] real answers to my questions above (https://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=97020.msg1903488#msg1903488)
I get that admins will sometimes make decisions that make a lot of people unhappyand IMO it's not worth my getting riled up over that alone.
Where is it? I still want to know what exactly he said that got him accused of being a white supremacist.
...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.
That said, Goober did promise to apologise and what he has posted thus far is completely lacking.
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.
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.
First... I accused Goober of being a white supremacist supporter.However, Goober perceived it as "white supremacist", even if incorrectly, and perceptions matter.
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.)
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.
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
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.
In fact, I learned this point on my very first day here:''''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)_/¯
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.)
But he should probably stand back and stand by. :V
Discord though
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.
Huh, interesting. I'll have to get back on that, then.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.Discord though
Yep. All the action is happening on there. So the forums look quiet.
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
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 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.
If I had to give a progress estimate, I'd say 70-80%, but don't quote me on that.
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.
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.
QuoteDon'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?
Let me reiterate: You are unaware of what has been going on.
Goober and myself, but by actions that everyone "else" took as well.
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!
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
Funny how when someone says "with all due respect", what they follow it with has none.
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.
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.
I'm being rude, I know. I'm sorry.
Sandwich isn't actually communicating, he's communicating a lack of communication.
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?
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?
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****
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.
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.
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 must have missed where Goober "belittl[ed] and insult[ed] everyone"; link please?
Man, if all this results in is Axem leaving, goddamn, something really is wrong with the way things are.
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?
QuoteI 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?
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.
QuoteI 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.
Are there any emergency plans to draft new staff members in that case?
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.I don't understand. How does the minority get to overrule the majority? Is it HLP ownership that wants to keep Goober as admin?
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 think this may provide the answer to my earlier question.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.
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.I don't understand. How does the minority get to overrule the majority? Is it HLP ownership that wants to keep Goober as admin?
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.
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.
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.
Maybe I'm naive here but why not just, uh, remove them both? Take the IDF approach to collateral damage here?
...
...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.
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.
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.
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?
Maybe I'm naive here but why not just, uh, remove them both? Take the IDF approach to collateral damage here?
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.
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?
What agreement?
Somewhat ironic that as his last action as admin, Sandwich unilaterally walked back on decisions that were made by a collective.
To be absolutely fair, the other side broke it first by de-admining Goober.
He did, but, well, we all know how people feel about it.To be absolutely fair, the other side broke it first by de-admining Goober.
Goober broke it first by not apologizing, surely? :P
Those who rejected my apology broke it first. I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.
Those who rejected my apology broke it first. I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.
Those who rejected my apology broke it first. I fulfilled all the terms of my agreement.
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.
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.
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.
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 know that you can still apologize, right?
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****.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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~
[...]
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.
[...]
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.
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'.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Goober and myself, but by actions that everyone "else" took as well.
So it's you two vs everyone else hmmm?
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, 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.
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.
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:
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:
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
Sandwich? More like Bannedwich
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.
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?