all the hating gotta stahp

[Thundy]

Hey, so, I leave for a month and get back and suddenly everyone is hating each other. THE PROBLEM WAS THAT I LEFT. There, I solved it. Now everyone can go home.

Reality: what the hell is going on? This has always ALWAYS been a ridiculously emotion fueled game but people seem to think that means it's okay to say and do whatever they want. I have cried because of what people have said here, on numerous occasions and I don't care how old we are, it hurts when someone calls you names. This server was my home when I went through a really hard part of my life. To me, this place has always had the potential to either build people up or tear them to shreds. You all mean a lot to me, whether you've been here since I first joined or you have just joined yourself.

Take a step back, everyone. This is a great place to hang out, a fun place to hang out and, for many of us, the only place where we can truly be ourselves. I believe that if you are so keen to leave, go ahead, I'll wave goodbye, but consider this: imagine what this place could be if we stayed and actually tried to work it through?

Even if there is very little hope, Aurora is my home and I'm going to go down with the ship, or, if I'm lucky, I'll ride that wave to see that her best days are ahead of her and not behind.

Don't give up people, there's hope yet. There's pain in the night, but joy comes in the morning.

[Tainavaa]

I just... want... the hardsuit... It's so close, yet... So far...

[Skull132]

I think the only sinking ship we can speak of is our current technical situation.

The rest is just assessment, voice of opinion and thoughts. This sorta thing happens when a community comes out of a prolonged growth-spurt and finds that it needs to actually figure out a few things, or change a few perspectives.

[Tainavaa]

I WANT IT.

[Eliot Clef]

I don't think there's really hating going on. Just a lot of personal frustration and issues with how certain things are going in terms of game philosophy at Aurora. I, too, have been coming here primarily because it allows me to hit the release valve and completely tune out all of the stuff that was burning me out on other facets of life, the universe, and everything.

People get mad, things happen, and sometimes philosophies clash. Don't stress over them too much, especially in a hobby community like this one.

[Jakers457]

Aurora is going through puberty. Hair is growing in weird places and other places have gotten bigger. Not mention the angst.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

That's just what a fascist would say.

[the_furry]

I have noticed we’ve been losing a lot of decent people due to perceived hostilities on the station. Hell it’s probably why I’ve taken such a long break on the game. For me, there’s just too many characters that are quick to call you dumb/retarded/idiot/what have you, the moment you meet them. There’s really no way to interact with that other than either not rping/ignoring them or returning the hostilities. The former is unsatisfying leaving the player to continue unimpeded. The latter will only perpetuate hostilities.

I don’t think that this issue is a sinking ship but I do believe it’s an issue that needs to be resolved if we want to retain quality RP and friendly members on the server. we’re talking about the quality and design of the autistics of the ship. How do we want this ship to look like? I for one am for a more friendly environment. Where it’s ok to ask how to do a part of a job if you’re new without being threatened to be fired or cussed out for incompetency and the moment you introduce yourself your not called an idiot by security officers.

This discussion isn’t going to make or break Aurora, she will remain alive in some fashion. But this will change the perception she has among the community; the quality of roleplay on the server; and the member base that staffs Aurora. Because of this I do think it’s an extremely important conversation. If we are starting to loose several quality members because of a perceived hostility that should be throwing up a red flag and we need to take a look at this issue: regardless of whether it’s simply perceived or actual it needs to be addressed or we risk losing other members.

[Conservatron]

honestly, and im going to be blunt here, i'm more sick and tired about people talking about a vague sense of hostility than any actual hostile environment. The server is growing, its changing, its not a sinking ship and I feel like some people are upset about the direction its taking, its different than it was when we split from apollo and i understand that not everyone likes it but everything just reeks of rationalization. Maybe people need to step back a bit, its great to be invested in the community, its fine to be emotional about things, but not everything is a personal insult or attack on you, separate the ic from the ooc.

And I want to say again, its not a sinking ship. Everyone who says it is has a warped perception, aurora is bigger than ever and I've had more quality rounds recently than six months ago. We are regularly one of the top three servers on the ss13 list, so if that's your idea of dying then you need a reality check.

And yes, we should be accommodating to people who don't really know how to do their jobs. That's why every department has their apprentice and intern positions. They're designed with IC instruction of positions in mind.

[VoltageHero]

I've going to be real here.

A lot of people who have been leaving as of late just decide "the server is going downhill, you all are bullies people with poo-poo attitudes, and it's not my problem", and this isn't even the real reason for half of the people leaving (if you want to try and dig into them).

A lot of the people I've seeing leave as of late, are leaving (in reality) for one of three reasons. Either, they have simply burnt out on RP, and don't feel like playing anymore, they don't like the amount of new players and liked it better when Aurora was a smaller 20-30 player server, or just don't like certain RP (too much chair-RP, not enough chair-RP, too many antags, not enough antags, etc etc).

Are there sometimes arguments in OOC from time to time? Sure. Is it a rampant as some users like to say it is? No.

The issue is that people are having issues in enjoying the server, and decide to blame the server as a whole for their lack of interest of fun in the game.

[Jakers457]

I don't think it is wise to assume people's motives Voltage. If a good number of people are stating the same reasons for them leaving, then you got to take that reasoning into consideration. To disregard a reoccurring complaint is pretty foolish, and this issue was overlooked in the past, and since then the amount of people leaving has had a more or less steady increase.

Perhaps we can mock those friends, indulge in our own egos if you will, in how witty or funny we are to satirize the issue but then we won't get anywhere. I think some of us are/should be above it.

The bottom line, the most simplest of ways to put it is... we need to be less dickish, we get caught up in what we think and we to take a step back. We need to be nicer, not dishonestly nice, but a civil nice where we don't end up with circlejerking threads.

ALSO, I think the complaints board should be remove or atleast made it so the general community can't have their input into a thread. It's a good first step away from the bitching culture.

[Skull132]

ALSO, I think the complaints board should be remove or atleast made it so the general community can't have their input into a thread. It's a good first step away from the bitching culture.

 

An idea for this was provided. And while there are pros and cons to executing either method, I think we should review them. Not now, not in this thread, but I may be able to draft up the two ideas present on the matter over the coming week.

[Tainavaa]

And a slew of other things as well. A lot of people interpret these going-ons on the forum as hostility. I personally have not interpreted it that way for the vast majority of it.

I've asked for two things formally since I've been here, and I've kept my bitching to a minimum until very recently.

[Guest Menown]

I'm going to come right out and say it.

No.

[Cassie]

Removing the complaints board will not fix the internal issues within the community that is causing stuff to happen. So no, a bit pointless.

[Erik Tiber]

The problem is that the community on Aurora has a tendency to sweep problems under the rug. The problem is not the complainers.

There's a number of long-standing problems which have not been addressed. Removing the ability of the community to comment on complaints threads will do nothing to solve the problems. Threads will still be made in general. And if those get locked, then I will probably leave the community myself, frankly.

I'm personally used to a forum where the staff enforces good faith debating, which focuses on the substance of a debate. The tone of a message is not an excuse to dismiss it. And if someone debates in bad faith, even if they're polite while doing so, they still get warned anyway or sometimes punished for dishonest debate tactics.

I'm also used to a forum where everyone can see what everyone else is saying, and although there's an IRC, it's so large that things aren't too secret. If someone else talks shit, you can quote their post. And if someone else is an asshole, you can quote that. But here it's different. People make heavy use of skype, obviously me included, and not everyone keeps perfect logs. So if someone is being an asshole in game, you don't always have instant evidence. So if the person is favored by the staff for some reason, you're shit out of luck. Here, for some reason there's the idea that you have to pretend to like everyone, that there's no conflict and that you can just ignore that. That's stupid. Yes, being polite is nice. This is a normal thing. I go on a forum where people are allowed to call other people ignorant asshats, in the correct context, and yet you can still have a perfectly civil conversation there. I have compared people to climate change deniers in one thread, and in another thread on a different subject when I thought they were making valid arguments, I would back them up and show no hostility about it. And if it's in a non-political thread about, say, fanfiction, I'm not gonna suddenly warble at them unless it's relevant to the topic at hand. But here, there is a very restrictive definition of 'relevant'.

There's a certain idea that simply making a statement about someone's behavior, even pointing out factual events which have occurred, is considered a 'hatefest' against that person. I'll just be honest and say that I'm referring to a discussion about Sue, and that my comments regarding dishonest debating referred to Frances' conduct within that thread, but that whole debacle is really emblematic of the larger problem. The fact that repeated threads got made about it, followed by nothing being done, is just part of the whole thing. People are perfectly capable of actually judging someone based on their behavior without, you know, having to call them a bad person all the time. I react based on behavior all the time. I'm not gonna bring up someone's bad behavior if they actually have owned up to it, or if it's not relevant to the topic.

There's also various other problems, such as unequal enforcement of the rules, and possibly some bureaucracy or whatever, but those problems can't even be assessed until people get over the fact that yeah, problems exist, we should be able to talk about them, criticizing someone's behavior is not the same as a 'personal attack', and we shouldn't pretend that we all like each other. Not to say that we should be assholes or rabid shitting monkies, of course, but seriously, this is literally one of the most dysfunctional communities I have participated in online. Note the word "participated", not known of. I've not participated in whatever other batshittery people get up to on other server forums, and apparently half the SS13 communities are like goddamn Deliverance compared to where I'm from, but really, being one of the shinier turds is not something to be proud of.

Not to downplay what Skull has done, since Skull is a cool guy, but yeah.

[Frances]

-snip-

 

I disagree with you to a point. Tone policing can be a problem, but as not everyone has the ability to call to reason 100% of the time and judge people solely on the content of their messages (while ignoring their tone), I can say that people will have a much easier time getting their point across if they're being polite. And you can say that "yeah, people need to be like me and stop being mad", but it won't stop them from being mad. That's a bit of why I feel like I'm at an impasse as to how to solve the issue of people being upset, actually.

Also, if you're drawing your impression of criticism being dismissed due to being "hateful" from several events, then carry on, but if most of this idea stems from the Sue threads, I'd like to raise an opposition. Not only was a large sum of the comments posted there ignoring either the established context of the complaints, or accusing Sue of engaging in continued negative behavior (without providing any evidence), but even after reviewing facts, staff chose not to punish Sue, because, you know, she wasn't being terrible.

I had asked repeatedly to be provided with evidence in that thread; nothing tangible was provided, which is why I feel comfortable calling it an actual attack.

Edit: I also think the reason why people showed animosity towards Sue is because they were convinced bad behavior had occurred, and not because they don't like her face or something. Why so many people seemed to think the same thing, I don't know - but one of the major issues is that people categorically refused to listen to a lot of evidence and explanations posted in that thread.

[Erik Tiber]

-snip-

I disagree with you to a point. Tone policing can be a problem, but as not everyone has the ability to call to reason 100% of the time and judge people solely on the content of their messages (while ignoring their tone), I can say that people will have a much easier time getting their point across if they're being polite. And you can say that "yeah, people need to be like me and stop being mad", but it won't stop them from being mad. That's a bit of why I feel like I'm at an impasse as to how to solve the issue of people being upset, actually.

In the past, people have dismissed arguments based solely on tone. And in Skype conversations, I have had incidents where people have called a discussion a 'hate fest' because people were bringing up actual actions which people actually did.

You can not dismiss a post's points based on the tone. The validity of the points is independent of the tone. If someone debates honestly, then their points should be engaged. If someone does not, then there is no point in engaging them.

If they are abrasive but debate honestly, that is less worthy of discipline and condemnation than someone who argues dishonestly using polite language.

The point is that criticism at all is considered hostility. It has in the past, been considered such.

Also, if you're drawing your impression of criticism being dismissed due to being "hateful" from several events, then carry on, but if most of this idea stems from the Sue threads, I'd like to raise an opposition. Not only was a large sum of the comments posted there ignoring either the established context of the complaints, or accusing Sue of engaging in continued negative behavior (without providing any evidence), but even after reviewing facts, staff chose not to punish Sue, because, you know, she wasn't being terrible.

I had asked repeatedly to be provided with evidence in that thread; nothing tangible was provided, which is why I feel comfortable calling it an actual attack.

Edit: I also think the reason why people showed animosity towards Sue is because they were convinced bad behavior had occurred, and not because they don't like her face or something. Why so many people seemed to think the same thing, I don't know - but one of the major issues is that people categorically refused to listen to a lot of evidence and explanations posted in that thread.

I'm personally all for starting another Sue thread, since the problem is very much still there. As for your post, arguments were already made in that thread. You did not debate with honesty and I do not see the point of trying to engage you here in this thread.

If you would like to discuss this further, we can take this to PM's as to avoid derailing the thread. I would prefer this over dropping the subject, because I would very much like to continue this conversation.

[Tainavaa]

Not everybody is going to be happy, Frances. It is literally impossible. I'm upset. I just want the hardsuit. Is it unreasonable?

Other people are upset because they believe Sue is just str8 power/metagaming. Is it unreasonable? I think it is because of my own experience. I don't support all of her actions but I do support most. Here's why. The last two or three days I've been playing warden a lot. I've been doing my job, and I have been gradually escalating force in an inverse manner to how compliant they are. If they are really pushing my buttons, I jump a level to relieve frustration. Not OOC frustration, I think what they do is fine. IC frustration. This is my character canonically abusing detainees and toeing the line on what is and isn't an acceptable level of force, as well as being well within reasonable limits of force. I actually haven't abused detainees because BWOINK but I've been bwoinked for two completely reasonable actions the last few days, both have been labeled "grief" by other players. And that's not the staff's fault, it's the players who cry grief. People don't like it when things don't go their way, and usually ONLY because things don't go their way. People seem to forego a philosophy of "Give me no reason to, and I won't." in favor of "You shouldn't anyway." Give me a good reason not to. And then I might listen.

However that doesn't mean that complaint threads should be forgone. If I recall, this server is about the community and when you take away the voice then it's no longer about the community. Unless you have another proper medium for complaints like that. I'll admit that a lot of complaints I see are unwarranted because I like to keep IC things IC, so long as they can be countered through IC means. That doesn't change the fact that the community has a right to a voice.

Despite my own beliefs on what an administrator should do, there are instances where they aren't right. I believe if someone can't provide solid enough reasoning for a complaint then the foot should come down saying "Deal with it". People will be upset over that. I was when the administration blew me off in my staff complaint thread. However it seems that a few of the administrators have had a change of heart since then. Why, I'm not certain. My point is, the system isn't - and very likely never will be, if taking example from other systems - perfect. But the answer isn't to take it away, it's either to replace it with a more refined system or refine the current one either through official standards or a standard mentality change. Maybe a mix of both or maybe neither. Could be something else changed with the system or something else pertaining to the community.

I don't truly know. I just want the hardsuit. I really, really do.

[Frances]

You can not dismiss a post's points based on the tone. The validity of the points is independent of the tone. If someone debates honestly, then their points should be engaged. If someone does not, then there is no point in engaging them.

It is poor practice to dismiss what someone says because of the way they say it, but your objective (as a part of a community where everyone should do their best to get along) is to get others to agree with you, not simply to be right.

And sadly, some people will ignore you because of tone, no matter what - which is why I believe it is important that we encourage people to moderate themselves in the way they choose to deliver their messages, because if not, it *will* create unavoidable conflict.

As for the other thing, can you contact me on the pager? My ckey is FFrances, with two Fs.

[Erik Tiber]

I'd like to clarify what I mean by dishonest debating, since there may be some confusion here. I think a better phrase may be, I don't know, bad faith debating. Poor debating. Something like that. Not literally just calling you a liar.

I don't mean that you're lying about the motivations of other people, I don't remember the specifics, but unless I actually reread the entire thread I'm going to assume you weren't. I don't think you're an a-hole or anything.

It mainly had to do with addressing points, not addressing points, stuff like that. Poor debating tactics might be the better word. And it's not like I think you're intentionally doing it either.

You can not dismiss a post's points based on the tone. The validity of the points is independent of the tone. If someone debates honestly, then their points should be engaged. If someone does not, then there is no point in engaging them.

It is poor practice to dismiss what someone says because of the way they say it, but your objective (as a part of a community where everyone should do their best to get along) is to get others to agree with you, not simply to be right.

And sadly, some people will ignore you because of tone, no matter what - which is why I believe it is important that we encourage people to moderate themselves in the way they choose to deliver their messages, because if not, it *will* create unavoidable conflict.

As purely personal advice, yes, tone is nice. That's getting into the effectiveness of their argument though, not whether they're actually debating honestly and is not relevant to whether or not the behavior is worthy of getting called out on. That's purely about how this behavior makes themselves worse off and has nothing to do with how it impacts others and how others may or may not be justified in responding. People should not dismiss something on tone, and if they do so they should, IMO, be called out for it by the administration. Maybe get a warning for it. I consider it worse than being abrasive but raising a good point.

People are able to look past the tone, they are capable of doing so. Of course it's best if people aren't assholes when delivering a message, but regardless, the person dismissing the argument based on tone alone should not be let off the hook at all, as what they did is dishonest. If they did not want to continue the debate they could stop posting in the thread. If they continue posting after dismissing an argument based on tone, they should be disciplined. And if they just keep fleeing whenever someone disagrees with them and constantly brings up the same points and constantly tries to claim victory, they're a problem.

I'm referring to kinda extreme instances here. Also note I have a certain problem poster on one of my previous forums online when I make that last statement, not anyone here.

As for the other thing, can you contact me on the pager? My ckey is FFrances, with two Fs.

Sure.

[Frances]

All I'm saying is, if someone debates like an asshole, even if they're right, no one's going to listen to them.

Quick example: Person A writes a rather acerbic reply to a question from person B, while also addressing said question. Later, person A is accused of "dismissing" the previous question by person B, because the tone they used was dismissive, although person A did also provide a clear answer. In this case, person B, more preoccupied with the appearance of the message than its content, feels like their question is not being taken seriously because of the way the response was written.

I would honestly find person B's reaction natural. Yes, you should do your best to judge people on what they say, not just on how they say it, but if someone acts like an asshole and no one listens to them because they act like an asshole (even if they're right), that's pretty much their own fault.

Additionally, when large groups of people start doing this, it becomes very hard to "discipline" them, because again, you're not trying to serve justice here, you are trying to get these people to understand you.

[Cassie]

People have not been listened to, and/or have been dismissed in the past, and this leads to frustration. This is what I see as natural.

Person B however, their reaction is natural yes. But it is the most negative in my eyes because it shows that they do not care for honesty in the situation, or the fact that maybe yes, something is wrong - and therefore is dangling the prospect of what is frustrating person A to being solved by telling them to change their tone. They might even secretly acknowledge their actions have been harmful or wrong but do not care because they are trying to control how people react to said actions.

Some people might see that as reasonable but I do not; that is an exercise of power in some cases. That's right; I am labeling that controlling behaviour.

Simply put, if you step on someone's toes accidentally, I can get why someone might say something like you said. You know? A miscommunication of sorts, a simple sorry, no need to bicker right?

But in my philosophy, which applies to this situation, if someone steps on someone elses' toes deliberately, or steps on their toes indirectly to achieve another goal or their own satisfaction but does not care about the other person's feelings, tries to justify this act, etc - that person has already broken civility, the person responding to that behaviour has not been the one to break the "peace". There are no "two wrongs don't make a right" about this situation - the person has every right to express anger and frustration and dare I say it - make a complaint.

So if I can put this straight, the anger and the tone of the posts are the most minor aspect of this community. I don't care what tone people write their posts in. In fact, if I've ever gotten angry at someone it's because of actions people have tried to get away with like being unfair, compared to if they lost their cool during a heated debate.

I can forgive and forget the latter very quickly as it is human, the former will actually make me resentful and I will not be able to trust whoever does it.

[Frances]

I said that I found the reaction I described natural. It is something that I understand, and while I appreciate people who can move past that, I don't expect everybody to. There's varying degrees of the behavior we discussed, and some are more acceptable than others. There are instances where people have presented things in an acceptable manner and been dismissed on trivialities, and there are instances where people have presented things in an utterly dickish way and been dismissed in a way I cannot hold anyone else responsible for.

For example, I find no issue with Cassie's posts. While she says she does not care about tone, I've never seen her write anything snide, mocking, or unjust about anyone. Other people, for various reasons, have engaged in aggressive and disruptive behavior - ranging from aggressive cursing, insults, ridiculing others' points, and so on.

I believe these are both issues worth being looked at - people being overly aggressive in their posts, and people dismissing acceptable posts under the guise of tone.

[Cassie]

Ay, I appreciate the sentiment Frances, but I do remember a few time I've gotten sarcastic and/or insulted people during a rant. In that aspect, maybe not a lot, but it definitely has happened. Guaranteed that whenever I post it is usually constructive, but occasionally those constructive posts will have a bit of mood in there - guess it's no black and white dichotomy.

I do recall one of my sassy posts on the paperwork thread, which was basically to drive a point home in a satirical manner. I was sarcastic and actually argued in a half-assed manner (still laying down my points, mind you) because I was very burnt out that day from things happening within the timeframe, including metabullying I was experiencing. I've received a warning since then, and I have toned down my posts substantially; even so, I do recall a thread I tried to start civilly getting torn down by tone-policers when I was calm as day and trying to get things resolved nicely. After this thread, it became a confirmation the true issue people had with me is what I was critiquing (something they identified with themselves), rather than how I critiqued it.

I have been less passionate lately as I have lost desire to play on the server, people might prefer me that way.

But generally, I think that if people swallowed their pride, and we focused less on the symptoms of the community and focused on what is causing unrest, things would be solved a lot faster.