Official System for Reporting Staff Confidentially

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Please set up a system where individual players can bring up concerns and complaints about staff conduct outside the server that can be handled as confidentially as possible. There is a huge hole in addressing potential staff misconduct outside the server itself. This is in regards to accusations of bullying, harassment, or other misconduct that take place on Discord.

These complaints and concerns should be visible only to the heads of administration who then decide if it is worth investigating or sharing with lower ranking administration for said investigations, or to simply have them on file like our note system. The ideal version of report would be filling out a complaint on the WI that is then visible to the head administrators and head developers. This is a much more formal system than private messaging a member of staff on discord and ensures visibility as well as proper handling. It also provides a much more official track record of these complaints than DM'ing disparate members of staff over periods of time.

This system is no different from how we report posts on the forum or provide notes on players. This fits within the existing structure of misconduct and punishment.

Aurora's system as it is set up rewards and enables abusive behavior from staff members in many ways. There is a very large disparity in power between a staff member, such as an admin or other management position, or even a regular developer, and that of a regular player or a staff member in a lower position. If there are concerns about bullying over discord or otherwise outside the server, the player making the complaint has all of the burden placed on them to investigate it for themselves. There are no other situations wherein administration throws up their hands and declines to look into accusations of misconduct. This burden on the accuser is in and of itself is a reward for the very misconduct that staff should seek to a avoid.

This does not mean that every DM should trigger a full investigation. This means that players, and members of staff, should be made aware that there is official support for confidentially providing concerns and complaints of abuse or misconduct from staff. This is no different from the server's Notes system.

If there are several people privately bringing up concerns on a certain individual, there is no doubt that eventually the Head administration can determine when a reasonable threshold has been reached to trigger an actual investigation into these accusations, in whatever method or intensity that investigation entails. Not every single complaint needs to trigger an investigation, just like not every player note triggers a full investigation. But if there are disparate, longstanding patterns of reports, then staff has the need to look into it and take action. There is no fair system currently of applying this kind of note system to staff members in cases of harassment or bullying.

This process of confidential reporting is available in many organizations, which is usually HR. This tiny RP server can't really have an HR department, so our reports should go to our relevant administration. The reports going directly to the heads of the server also in and of itself discourages flippant use of the system.

Being faced with the choice between publicly accusing someone on staff, especially if they are popular or influential, of harassment or bullying is very intimidating. They may worry about rocking the boat, or being branded as someone that stirs drama, or immediately alienating themselves from mutual friends or entire groups of friends of them and the person they are accusing. Sometimes, it’s hard to tell whether or not a concern warrants a complaint in the first place. Many of what seems like misconduct between people can be a misunderstandings that snowballs. Having been here for 6 years before my departure recently, I can attest that there are loads of people that either talk about being intimidated about making a complaint or knowing someone that has been.

It should not be up to the player to be the one investigating a much more powerful member of staff to determine if there is a sufficient basis for an investigation. That should be administration's job. We should not rely on repeatedly creating high profile staff complaints to have an official record of patterns of misconduct. Nor should we rely on the loosey goosey DM'ing of whatever staff member we think is relevant at the time. One head admin having a few people DM them with these concerns over a few months is not a reliable method of resolving concerns or potential misconduct.

Staff complaints about misconduct outside the server should be confidential and handled in the same professional way as public staff complaints. And it should be done in a way that minimizes retaliation against the person filing the complaint. Currently there are no protections against retaliation by the accused. Abuse and harassment is not something that should be entirely dropped onto the accuser to investigate and resolve. Requiring those that believe they are victims of abuse or bullying should not be required to pick a very public fight with their accusatory personally.

Creating this official report system is necessary to ensure even members of our community who feel they are being mistreated by members of staff have an outlet to express their concerns without feeling the overwhelming sense of fear and trepidation that a public fight necessarily entails. Minimizing the power dynamic between the accused and accusing will ensure a more fair and consistent application of the rules and standards that we agree to follow when we engage with Aurora.

All of this does hinge on the impartiality of our four Heads, which we should reasonably count on.

I strongly believe that if people trust that they will be protected against retaliation when they want to bring forward complaints that we will see this system used.

Edited May 20, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[Alberyk]

I don't know if I want this, because this is like going against our supposed lack transparency. Pming people to look into issues turned to be an awful and confusing deal that I think we should avoid. There is already the forum rules and the like to handle people trying to dogpile on someone's complaint already. Also, people can't see the resolution would not really be helpful or very transparent, and staff would know who is making the complaint based on whatever happened and what they are told after.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

This is not DM'ing people. This is giving a report to two head administrators and two head developers. this is the opposite of DM'ing someone. It's a formal system set in place in organizations all over the world.

The rules against dogpiling are ineffective as to be meaningless. Once again, you are only able to react against immediate behavior already highly visible on the forums.

Retaliation and harassment isn't always done on server or on the forums or even in the official staff discord. Abuse is not done out in the open. You have no systems to reliably protect victims speaking up about abuse against retaliation. In many cases witnesses to the abuse are discouraged from participating with their testimony because they don't want to deal with the retaliation.

Having an avenue for confidential complaints against co-workers is a mainstay for organizations. Not everyone is brave enough to publicly fight their harassers.

There is no issue with transparency here. The reports go to our four highest ranking members of staff. It is the opposite of acting on accusatory DM's.

Even with your stated flaws, a system where we have 10 irreverent reports of misconduct and 3 substantial ones is a system that is succeeding. Not every staff complaint leads to any resolution, so we can risk retaliation or being seen as a shit stirrer without the guarantee that we will see any resolution.

Edited May 20, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[Scheveningen]

21 minutes ago, Marlon Phoenix said:

The reports go to our four highest ranking members of staff.

What would be the point of employing staff, then? You don't think moderators or admins should get a say in how to deal with abusive community members, including staff among themselves?

Further, this brings up an incredibly important question: Who watches the watchmen who watch the watchmen?

Edited May 20, 2020 by Scheveningen

[Pratepresidenten]

@Marlon Phoenix What part outside of the server do you mean. Which aspect of discord is it?

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

@Pratepresidenten I'm sorry, I'm not sure what exactly your question means. Are you asking what aspect of discord/off server mediums can be used for retaliation or harrassment? 

 

Edited May 20, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[Pratepresidenten]

The latter, the harrassment. Is it on the Aurora discord?

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Retaliation, abusive or improper behavior, and harrassment can happen in DMs and 3rd party affiiliated servers or ancillary aurora servers of friends.

Expanding on this, there is no method of bringing concerns or documenting patterns of behavior (or recognizing a misunderstanding that leads to a belief of misbehavior) from a staff member without a player personally making a public staff complaint to confront the staff in question. 

It's as if every single ahelp was instead a full player complaint. We, within a reasonable degree, protect the identity of the ahelper. 

I personally remember DMing whatever staff i thought was relevant about troubling attitudes and behavior from someone on staff because it was upsetting but not something I'd make a full staff complaint over because of all the baggage. And i was the head of a department. Regular players have a lot more to be anxious about when wanting to bring up concerns about staff.

So having a formal way of documenting these concerns is better for everyone and the method with it going to our four highest staff members keeps the whole thing pretty good. Since we dont have HR, this is the most reasonable way of handling these issues.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

@Pratepresidenten that got long winded. The short is yes, and it can also happen in many other areas. There's no way to officially voice complaints about patterns of misconduct without public staff complaints. And that has a lot of problems with intimidation and fears of retaliation.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[Pratepresidenten]

Although I can see the merit with confidentiality and such, I kinda feel it goes against what people want. People want transparency and for things to be in the open, yet we should put in a system that is the most hush-hush that only the punished party will know of. Whats to say said staff member wouldnt use deductive reasoning to pinpoint whoever complained? Even more easily if they're told "You cant do X, or you need to reign in your shit with on Y"

There is also the thing about staff not really being staff past the boundries of whats officially Aurora, players can be as nice or as shit they want outside the Aurora bounds without much issue, so why wouldnt this apply to staff aswell? Although, depending on the issue, you can get a hard slap or worse from HR for bad shit happening outside the workplace, this isnt really a workplace. I dont think its too much to ask for the staff to not be held to their "Official" standards at all times, no matter where.

There are, of course, exceptions, but if there are repetitive and persistent issues with someone, it should be put under the magnifying glass.

I can understand the apprehension and fear that might come with pointing a finger at someone "High profiled" like a staffmember, but having the spotlight put in your face surely isnt pleasant either?

All in all, Im not really supportive of this suggestion. If there is a clear issue, compile evidence, make a solid case and present it. Worst case scenario, you block the offending party where possible.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

This rationale is inconsistent. We already use this system in the form of player notes and ahelps. The identity of ahelpers is not made public. Notes are not made public. Comments about misconduct on server is handled with a level of confidentiality. I cant even see my own notes without asking and having a good reason. Demanding complaints or concerns about staff behavior be done in the public arena uses this inconsistency to reward retaliating against the person who is filing the complaint.

Staff has also punished behavior that has happened off server and away from our official discord. People have been disciplined for behavior in DMs or third party servers.

You cant just block members of staff that you believe are harassing or retaliating against you. And even when you do, they still have power over you by virtue of being staff.

Ive also had an issue where i was being what amounted to stalking by another popular player on and off server that was reported and partially resolved confidentially. Though in the end i was told to make a complaint if it continued, i did not need to make a public complaint and confront publically someone making me profoundly uncomfortable. I cant imagine what id do if it was someone on staff, especially someone prominent. 

This report system doesnt do anything but formalize a process by which all we can do now is DM an admin with a concern or have the consequences of posting a staff complaint. 

I hope i can help you see that your implicit trust in staff complaints and belief theres no room for retaliation or marginalization of a complaining player speaks to how you yourself are in a position of authority that has not ever felt these concerns.

I have, and so have others.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Currently if a dev is doing misconduct I can report them by DMing skull or arrow. That complaint is then kept in their discord DM history unless they choose to share it.

Complaints being visible to all four heads in an official capacity is a lot less arbitrary and is MORE transparent than we have now.

[Peppermint]

I personally agree with Prate rather heavily on this one

 

. No system is perfect, but being able to search up complaints is very helpful imo - a lot of other servers have their admin complaint boards private, which is bleh.

 

I'm also really confused where this negativity toward the staff is coming from. I'm fairly opinionated about these things so it's not like I'm shilling, but Aurora seems - to me at least - to be very solid on the staff front. I've had a few minor issues with staff members but most were dealt with fine though, then again, maybe I'm missing something. 

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

We can already DM staff members with logs about misconduct and it can be acted on. I have personally given every Head at least one DM bringing up problematic behavior.

This is not an effective system. There are no logs. The best equivilant to what we have now is every single note being on a personal notepad of each individual staff member leaving a note on a player. How can you say this would at all be transparent or effective for management? Formalizing a report system creates MORE accountability and fairness, not less.

This is also not about hostility to staff. I'm not hostile to staff. Do you think you can see how me speaking up wanting a more accountable and consistent system to tackle the problems of staff misconduct is seen as hostility towards staff shows an inherent flaw in expecting everyone to publically speak out about issues they see?

Im not asking for the complaints board to be made private. If reports lead to Heads deciding an issue should be a player complaint instead then thats a possible outcome.

17 minutes ago, Lemei said:

I've had a few minor issues with staff members but most were dealt with fine though, then again, maybe I'm missing something. 

How do you know for sure there's no one that is facing problematic behavior as a victim or witness but is being kept quiet because they dont want to be seen as "hostile to staff"?

[Scheveningen]

1 hour ago, Lemei said:

I personally agree with Prate rather heavily on this one

 

. No system is perfect, but being able to search up complaints is very helpful imo - a lot of other servers have their admin complaint boards private, which is bleh.

 

I'm also really confused where this negativity toward the staff is coming from. I'm fairly opinionated about these things so it's not like I'm shilling, but Aurora seems - to me at least - to be very solid on the staff front. I've had a few minor issues with staff members but most were dealt with fine though, then again, maybe I'm missing something. 

Yeah there's a pretty strange bit of doublethink going on here, how does someone simultaneously think Aurora staff is abusive/filled with bullies and power abusers, and then think that more policy changes, more procedure, and more regulation on the staff side would somehow fix this? Doesn't it stand to reason that would only make this worse for everyone who is not in the "staff bully" category? 

Because the reality is that if there were abusive staff members at the current moment, they'd probably be skirting by because they don't break the rules, they obey them but with a maliciously compliant twist. It's relatively easy to get away with it since they're obeying the rules. Which is why "more rules" doesn't often help, and in fact harms the capability of the benign and actually caring staff members to be aware of problems and do their job without red tape in the way.

Leaning towards agreeing with Prate in this instance, the very premise of this suggestion seems to misunderstand the role of the Shadow Council, the majority of the logistics bulk is carried by the combined efforts of the lower ranked staff, and higher staff proportionately deal with only strategic/tactical/operational problems of higher importance. "This person is harassing me" and "this person who is staff is harassing me" exist in the same category, but only one is more serious than the other. I think it should fall to the respective team leader to decide at the end of the day, and public reports do the job well. They allow the accuser and the accused to discuss the problem and argue their case for the broader community, also giving examples of how to respond or how not to respond, respectively. Staff gets the opportunity to judge the situation with the evidence they're armed with, and sift context from content.

I cannot see "confidential reports" as an official system being particularly fair and beneficial for the community in the long-run, especially in the instances where accusations of harassment are from a subjective viewpoint and not an objective one. Here's the thing: a human's judgement cannot always be right. I see far more abuse from an Stasi-like system where people are encouraged to inform on other players or staff to the shadow council every little out-of-context incriminating detail (that fucks with the Shadow Council's purpose anyway, and would flood them with a shit-ton of information that is often not objective or substantiated with impartial context), and the person being informed upon gets no chance to defend themselves, and I just view that as far more insidious than what we have currently. It would murder any trust between players, staff (who are also players) and any contributors for this game, in its bed. We'd be so much worse off with this. The current system has flaws but it's better than anything else right now.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

There is no doublethink going on here. Staff have been dismissed for misconduct. Ergo, staff are capable of misconduct. That is not the same as saying all staff are engaging in misconduct. Your argument is only rational if no member of staff has ever engaged in misconduct.

You are also mistaken in the nature of this suggestion. Please refer to this specific section:
 

Quote

 

We can already DM staff members with logs about misconduct and it can be acted on. I have personally given every Head at least one DM bringing up problematic behavior.

This is not an effective system. There are no logs. The best equivilant to what we have now is every single note being on a personal notepad of each individual staff member leaving a note on a player. How can you say this would at all be transparent or effective for management? Formalizing a report system creates MORE accountability and fairness, not less.

 

To reiterate again,

Promoting a formal method of bringing grievances about misconduct is the nature of this proposal. I am focusing on the issues about fearing retaliation and the power dynamic at play when facing misconduct from popular/influential members of staff to highlight the reasons that many issues can be kept buried with our current inconsistent system. I myself, despite being the head of a department, at many points let misconduct go without formal comment because I was worried about retaliation from the person or their friends.

To add,

I'm known as being very loud and open about my feelings and beliefs. If my concerns are being silenced, then it's very easy for me to emphasize with regular players who lack the power I had. This isn't even accounting for my personal conversations with players who were in this exact same situation.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[UnknownMurder]

On 20/05/2020 at 00:57, Scheveningen said:

What would be the point of employing staff, then? You don't think moderators or admins should get a say in how to deal with abusive community members, including staff among themselves?

Further, this brings up an incredibly important question: Who watches the watchmen who watch the watchmen?

I'd like to echo this question. This is a very good point that remains unanswered. 

I also agree with Prate. Aurora players have fought/begged (myself included) and wanted transparency for complaints. Players and community members have sought for a transparency relationship between the non-staff and the staffs. It is essential that the players remain conscious of what is happening, why is it happening, and how to avoid a certain incident. This way, we can all learn from each other's mistakes/punishment and make better judgements. 

1 hour ago, Marlon Phoenix said:

Do you think you can see how me speaking up wanting a more accountable...

I want to say I firmly believe that if you have a solid case and you 'accuse' someone of breaking rules with a descriptive explanation and concrete evidence. No doubt the accused will be the one likely at fault. 

However... On the other hand... 

1 hour ago, Marlon Phoenix said:

How do you know for sure there's no one that is facing problematic behavior as a victim or witness but is being kept quiet because they dont want to be seen as "hostile to staff"?

So, I'm going to go in paragraphs about 'hostile to staff' because I have not been hostile to/inuslted staffs for a long time. I will agree this is a problem for some people. Welcome to the Internet, in case you have not noticed, it is difficult to see how the recipient sees your message and it is difficult for some receive certain messages that you are trying not to be hostile.As the accused/witness/accuser, I make sure I word my words carefully before I say something officially regarding a staff and often hesitate before saying something. I ask myself these questions. I do not want to appear as hostile or rude. Please note when I say you I refer to the reader of these paragraphs wanting to learn more, not Marlon Phoenix.

• Do my words hold weight?
  • If no: Don't say anything.
  • If yes: Say something. Show concrete evidence. "John Doe griefed Jane Doe. Here are the logs and his reasoning. I'm not sure if he is an antag because [fill in the blank]."
• Do I want to call out someone? 
  • If not, don't do it. Word it.  "Someone griefed Jane Doe."
  • If you don't know. Do not say someone. "I think Jane Doe was griefed. Not sure who."
  • If yes, make sure you label it with facts and do not include your feelings. "I saw John Doe grief Jane Doe."
• Do I want to make a serious accusation?
  • If not: Word your words carefully that you do not offend or call out someone yet. "I am not sure who abused the wall glitch."
  • If yes. "I just saw John Doe bug abuse the wall glitch."

So, you got spoken to, warned, or banned and you would like to know more about your reasoning to why you were banned? Say these magic words - these words will make you less hostile/aggressive and more wanting to learn and improve. Always start a "May I ask a question?" otherwise moderator/admins will ticket you for 'arguing in adminhelp'. If staff says no, it's not the end of the world. You still can take it to forums and ask questions there. If staff says yes, ask these questions. They are polite and attempting to show mutual understanding.

• I do not understand. Can you help me understand more to why this was not a good idea. 
• Okay so, you tell me not to do X though I had Y reasoning. Could you explain your opinion why this is wrong?

If you get ticketed for 'arguing in adminhelp', launch that staff complaint asap. You will most likely 'win' this argument and get it revoked from your notes. This is because the staffs allowed you have a moment to ask you a question. Be sure to word the question and your opinion carefully and acknowledge the staff's perspective on it, otherwise you will seem as if you're arguing. Most may not allow for follow-up question because one question was asked. Do not ask these questions or appear as overly aggressive.

• NO, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. YOU SEE. HE DID IT TO ME SO I HAD DO IT TO HIM. (caps lock is bad and makes you appear as screaming and defending on your last leg. "He did it so I did it." will never work.)
• You're a trial mod, so let me make things clear as elementary. (Do not ever consider someone lower than a moderator. Treat them with respect as they would to you.)
• You know. You're being asshole. You not giving letting me out to do my antag stuff. I'm telling you. The shithole officer arrested me for no reason. (Do not use vulgarity in any adminhelps or call an admin names.
• BWOINK! You got a time to talk?  [no response after 10 minutes] (You could be permanently banned for not saying anything.)
• BWOINK! You got a time to talk?  No. (If you don't have time to respond, then you don't have time to play games, yeah?)

It falls back to square one. Be nice, be kind, be courteous. It's like the same concept as SS13 Colonial Marines. If someone shoots you intentionally, don't shoot back. Just adminhelp it and it will count as grief. If you shoot back, it does not count a grief. If someone insults you OOCly, don't insult back. Just adminhelp/put it on staff complaint. You might be helping someone later in the future and you'll help each other rid of toxicity. Don't get involved in any drama and talk about positive things and you'll be alright. If someone's negative to you, just brush it past and leave it be. It's a sign of good respect and people will look up to you for avoiding positive leeches. 

While this is a problem, I do not believe that making reports confidential is the right solution to this problem. I believe the right solution is for both parties to understand and acknowledge each other. Players can have a lack of confidence and they are willingly to speak with people privately whether it be staff or non-staff. I will reference this topic of mine because it relates to people speaking to each other in private messages with lack of confidence to bringing out to the public because people are afraid of angering/accusing/criticizing a person who has a great control and could make something happen. Marlon Phoenix is free to back it up as it is less than a year old.

 

To summarize my stance in a single sentence, I am neutral. I will agree with Marlon Phoenix on what the problem is but I cannot agree that making reports confidential is the right solution to the problem. 

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

We can already make confidential reports by DM'ing a member of staff and staff has, does, and will act on these including punishments.

The purpose of this  report system is for a formal log of these complaints that has the double benefit of allowing people to make the same manner of complaints but in a way that is visible and logged by all four of our heads and thus easier for them to track and put into potential patterns of behavior. If six people DM Skull about a Developer engaging in misconduct then he does not need a public staff complaint to remove them. However, scattered DM's to different staff members is not an effective method of monitoring staff misconduct.

27 minutes ago, UnknownMurder said:

What would be the point of employing staff, then? You don't think moderators or admins should get a say in how to deal with abusive community members, including staff among themselves?

This is not an anarchist server. If skull and garn lose faith in someone, they are gone.

Quote

Further, this brings up an incredibly important question: Who watches the watchmen who watch the watchmen?

We already have the buck stop with skull, arrow, alberyk, and garnascus at the time of this thread. All four of them will see these reports. So each other.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[Scheveningen]

54 minutes ago, Marlon Phoenix said:

There is no doublethink going on here. Staff have been dismissed for misconduct. Ergo, staff are capable of misconduct. That is not the same as saying all staff are engaging in misconduct. Your argument is only rational if no member of staff has ever engaged in misconduct.

There is doublethink going on. You're projecting your own distrust of staff to justify that there should more policy, more rules, more regulations for staff to work with. That makes no sense. That's giving them more power. What makes you think even head staff are immune to this, hypothetically speaking? Hell, instances of toxic environments have been well documented and often go all the way to the top in terms of responsibility. Read this article and tell me if you think giving more oversight powers to the board of directors/HR at Riot is a good response to that situation: https://kotaku.com/inside-the-culture-of-sexism-at-riot-games-1828165483 Or don't, I'm not your dad.

This isn't to draw comparisons as if the head staff here are remotely comparable to the above article, though, but rather to highlight what a real worst-case scenario looks like. Aurora is, thankfully, nowhere close, and the current staff line-up is doing a damn good job at preventing that uncertain future.

I don't think you get to determine whose arguments are rational when you've essentially suggested to create a staff program that bypasses the oversight of the majority of the existing volunteerforce, as well as essentially encouraging people to inform on their neighbors to bypass an existing system that is honestly as transparent as it'll get. Just because you're comfortable with the concept doesn't mean this is a good idea. Radical change to a system to positively improve it cannot be done top-down, it must be done from the bottom-up, as many progressive businesses and work environments are already catching on to.

And as you already mentioned and as most long-time community members already know, staff exist to be reached out to regarding any concern of behavior regarding specific community members. This doesn't have to per se have to be about a bully, it can be about someone who seems notably depressed and could be at risk of hurting themselves in the real world. I would even come forward and outright say I've been helped numerous times by staff just as a player in the regard of just feeling less shitty about myself. Those staff members didn't have to step up to try and improve my day but they did anyway. And it's a bit upsetting to me to see threads like this, because either people haven't experienced that kind of outreach of kindness yet due to not knowing about someone having a problem, or people are just taking for granted how much staff do for this place, for free, literally.

It legitimately baffles me that you've been here for so long, and your response is "staff did bad before, they could do bad again, so let's set up an official inform-on-your-neighbor channel to deter this happening again!" because I absolutely assure you that given enough time, that official channel would evolve into something genuinely ugly based on how the community would end up using it. Humans are not inherently bad people, but they're highly adaptive. They'll retaliate when attacked, which leads to more retaliation and petty fighting, self-defense is human nature. We don't need more reason to fight each other, just please no. I've seen enough 10+ page forum drama threads that I've had my fill of SpaceDrama intrigue forever.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Scheveningen

[Arrow768]

I think there are two things mixed together here. A system to track the outcome of investigations (no matter the source) in a consistent and centralized manner (simmilar to the notes system on the server). And a system to confidentially report things. 

Peronally I am not a huge fan of the current system which (in some cases) encourages players to DM a staff member with their grievances (be it a headmin/dev about staff behavior or a admin due to player behavior). 

The problem with it is, that it is often not clear who has investigated what, what evidence has been investigated and what the resolution was. This is further complicated if the handling person retires from the staff team.

Even if the investigation, and its outcome is communicated to other relevant people (I.e. Me pinging skull about something I looked into) then that information will most likely be forgotten after some time has passed due to the nature of discord.

So I do agree that there should be some sort of system to (at least) track the investigations that occurred, their process and outcome in a orderly manner. (We have something like that already as the staff complaint archive, but that is not the easiest to navigate and only works for staff complaints)

 

The biggest question is if confidential reports are worth implementing. (As quite often a person will be able to detuct from the context who complained about them. Which is the main augment for confidential complaints.) Personally I could see such a system being implemented, however with a much stricter "access control". (I.e. In addition to the usual staff complaint format, having to specify why it is not possible to report something as staff complaint; and if there is insufficient reasoning, such a report is rejected) 

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

 

7 hours ago, Arrow768 said:

The biggest question is if confidential reports are worth implementing. (As quite often a person will be able to detuct from the context who complained about them. Which is the main augment for confidential complaints.) Personally I could see such a system being implemented, however with a much stricter "access control". (I.e. In addition to the usual staff complaint format, having to specify why it is not possible to report something as staff complaint; and if there is insufficient reasoning, such a report is rejected) 

One of my main arguments is we really already have confidential complaints, but its in the hodgepodge way you identified as an issue.

While it's reasonable to say that someone can use context to infer who complained, it is still a good practice. Not every complaint has to lead to an investigation that can tip off someone. It's almost a garuntee that you or a head admin would contact someone that gave them something concerning in a report, and they'd be able to communicate and decide if they want to pursue the matter (even if it means outing themselves or not if the evidence is contextual)

[nonno_anselmo]

I would like to see a system like this being implemented, some of the complaints i have seen simply ended up being wriggled out of because of the accused player's popularity or because people swarmed to defend a lost cause and resulting in the derailing of the complaint itself rendering it pointless.

[Scheveningen]

When has that happened in the former case? Same question with the latter, as staff have upheld a zero-tolerance policy on peanut posting. Complaints rarely get out of hand anymore.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

This suggestion is focused on complaints about staff and covering the large hole and inconsistencies pointed out well by Arrow, and my specific concerns about intimidation and fear of retaliation baked into our current system. I think it's a seperate suggestion to encompass regular player complaints in a report system if i understand your post correctly.

And thank you for your support.

Edited May 29, 2020 by Marlon Phoenix

[Skull132]

Staff complaints which, for whatever reason, need to remain confidential, should go through the respective head of staff. This system already exists, per say. The only short-coming is what Arrow highlighted, namely the fact that these investigations aren't logged and marked down too well. But that is not necessarily tied to how the complaint is issued.

The only cases where you would ever use this system is when a staff member has done something incredibly egregious or dubious. And historically, this has been the case.

Player complaints of this nature would receive a, "Hell no" from me. The only time a player complaint would deserve this level of confidentiality is if personally identifiable information is involved. In which case, again, you go to the head admins on discord/forums.