Surprised not to see...

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

 ...I'm unsure of whom exactly you're apologizing to...

...Dres

---

 

To TDD and the thread participants in general. As I said, my post added nothing to the conversation but acrimony.

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Nevertheless, as we seem to agree, it matters not.  LL have the forum they want and no wishing on any mere, forum participant's part is going to change that.

...Dres

---

I don't see how you could expect anything different.

Think of it this way - if you go into a small owner-operated store it's not uncommon for you to see a cat or dog hanging out there. If you go to a store that's part of a chain, you'll almost never see that. The reason is that the owner of a small store is in a position to judge whether or not the benefit of having their pet there outweighs any possible mayhem that may be caused - I used to shop at a vintage clothing store run by a woman who had both a white and a black cat living there, basically guaranteeing that anything you bought would have some sort of visible cat hair on it. If you couldn't deal with that you probably wouldn't shop there.

However, in a chain store any mayhem would quickly become the problem of someone miles away who Does. Not. Want. To. Deal. With. It. And honestly, shouldn't have to deal with it because Fluffy being there doesn't improve their life in the slightest. So Fluffy stays home because the hand holding the money says so.

In a forum, any moderation that isn't strictly mechanical will require some sort of judgement and at least be percieved as "taking sides", and the moderator will become the de facto voice of the company. If the conversation is about the company's product itself then the company has a reason to work something out. However, if it's just people talking about unrelated subjects it does the company absolutely no good to get involved and be seen as taking positions on these issues.

 It's different for a company than for a voluntary group - for instance, take a look at the Firestorm JIRA. You'll probably quickly notice that one of the major voices of Firestorm on the JIRA... well... let's just say "has a way about her." Now imagine how it would look if that same voice was coming from someone with the last name of Linden. SLU will always be better able to tolerate "lively" discussion because the moderation only represents the forum itself and in the end the forum's business is discussion anyway.

[Ted McGregor]

You added the answer I was thinking of spot on in the first half of your first post.

To me that is still the best answer in the thread and was confirmed by other answers stating that the level of misogyny ( or misandry for that matter ) within Second Life is based on user input ; something you already said right there.

The gamergate discussion usually deals about videogaming without ingame design based on user-input, but which has been created by 'professional' game-designers . Usually those are males that cater to a ,usually young, male  market from the early days of gaming on.

But that market needs to shift now. Gaming is, as we all know, no longer exclusively a guy thing and is in contrast to the  early days of gaming. This discussion is about aesthetics that need to suit more but one gender. Which is no wonder since the gaming industry equals or exceeds the motion picture industry in revenue and profit already.

But some hardcore gamers playing those games will not abide to censorship or alterations of their kind of game. And so gamergate went out of control with the results that are known now.

Aside that, discussing Anita Sarkeesian' main point about the Damsell-in-distress-syndrome within Second Life is hardly advisable and actually laughable.

Imagine how'd she react if she'd was somehow next to me immediately after creating her first account and I'd spank her right there on the spot ... 

:robotvery-happy:

Again the kind of repetition this forum doesn't need ( which is my own opinion ).

Your answer had all of that in it already. I agree with Phil you don't need to offer me an apology.

 

(I'll only accept it if you would like me to, but none is needed afaic.)

 

 

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

Wow,That's a name i haven't heard in a long time..

Scylla.

I think the last time i seen her was at the first hippystock hehehe

---

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet ~W.S.

...Dres

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Nevertheless, as we seem to agree, it matters not.  LL have the forum they want and no wishing on any mere, forum participant's part is going to change that.

...Dres

---

I don't see how you could expect anything different.

Think of it this way - if you go into a small owner-operated store it's not uncommon for you to see a cat or dog hanging out there. If you go to a store that's part of a chain, you'll almost

never

see that. The reason is that the owner of a small store is in a position to judge whether or not the benefit of having their pet there outweighs any possible mayhem that may be caused - I used to shop at a vintage clothing store run by a woman who had both a white and a black cat living there, basically guaranteeing that anything you bought would have some sort of visible cat hair on it. If you couldn't deal with that you probably wouldn't shop there.

However, in a chain store any mayhem would quickly become the problem of someone miles away who Does. Not. Want. To. Deal. With. It. And honestly, shouldn't

have

to deal with it because Fluffy being there doesn't improve

their

life in the slightest. So Fluffy stays home because the hand holding the money says so.

In a forum, any moderation that isn't strictly mechanical will require some sort of judgement and at least be percieved as "taking sides", and the moderator will become the

de facto

voice of the company. If the conversation is about the company's product itself then the company has a reason to work something out. However, if it's just people talking about unrelated subjects it does the company

absolutely no good

to get involved and be seen as taking positions on these issues.

 It's different for a company than for a voluntary group - for instance, take a look at the Firestorm JIRA. You'll probably quickly notice that one of the major voices of Firestorm on the JIRA... well... let's just say "has a way about her." Now imagine how it would look if that same voice was coming from someone with the last name of Linden. SLU will always be better able to tolerate "lively" discussion because the moderation only represents the forum itself and in the end the forum's business

is

discussion anyway.

---

I agree with you entirely.  It's the quality of judgement being used here, or lack thereof, with which I take issue.

...Dres

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

This Forum is exactly what (past) Management of Linden Lab wanted it to be.  Still other factors came in.  There was a

Similar Thread

related to this topic recently.  Quoting my own self from there I wrote:

"You are right, the old Forum was livelier.  But if you think back a lot of those updates were ongoing flame wars.  Some people could not post anything with out getting attacked.  There was really no moderation.  And it could get very tedious to try and discuss anything because the fights and disagreements took over the threads.  It was like the Hatfields and McCoys. 

On the other side now in this Forum we do have moderation.  My opinion is while it was needed it is too heavy handed.  Some people get their panties in a wad way too easy and are too fast on the RIC button.

Both extremes kill discussion.

And then we could add to this people who want to rule over this Forum.  They could be the worst thing that happens here but what can we do about it?  Add to this what do we do about people who post truly idiotic things.  How about the entitlement Generation who think LL or the Merchants or the Land Lords owe them something?  It sadly can all be very problematic."

I'd like to see things loosen up here.  I'd like for us to be able to discuss Adult topics without having to resort to PG language. 

When we had the 'Welcome Ebbe Thread' I said to him after we got his attention here (he was posting over in SLU), "Doesn't it seem odd that so many SL discussions are happening over there ratther than in Second Life's Forum."  Either he missed my point or he danced around it.  His reply, paraphrasing here, was, "I'm going to go where I have an audience."

---

This is pretty much precisely what I've been trying to say.  Though I'm less concerned about moderation loosening up than I am with consistency and accountability in the process.

...Dres

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

I've been away since I first posted in this thread. I should not, in fact, have posted at all. There was no need and I should not have injected 'acrimony' of my own into the conversation.  I just (as has been mentioned elsewhere) have a very aggressive response to someone saying 'discuss'.

---

There's no need to apologise for that. As you've seen, you are not the only one who reacts to the instruction "discuss", and I wrote my comments about it before I read yours. To my way of thinking, it's tantamount to a rudeness, and it gets right up my nose. It's the sort of thing that a teacher in authority might say to students, and not the sort of attitude a stanger coming in from the street should adopt.

---

I can understand why some may consider this practice a bit pompous, but, for the life of me, I can't understand why anyone would consider it offensive.

...Dres

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

 ...I'm unsure of whom exactly you're apologizing to...

...Dres

---

 

To TDD and the thread participants in general. As I said, my post added nothing to the conversation but acrimony.

---

Well, in that case, I apologize to everyone for the atrocious grammar displayed within the phrase you've quoted.

...Dres

[Paul Hexem]

I almost never type "lol", but...

lol, gamergate.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

This Forum is exactly what (past) Management of Linden Lab wanted it to be.  Still other factors came in.  There was a

Similar Thread

related to this topic recently.  Quoting my own self from there I wrote:

"You are right, the old Forum was livelier.  But if you think back a lot of those updates were ongoing flame wars.  Some people could not post anything with out getting attacked.  There was really no moderation.  And it could get very tedious to try and discuss anything because the fights and disagreements took over the threads.  It was like the Hatfields and McCoys. 

On the other side now in this Forum we do have moderation.  My opinion is while it was needed it is too heavy handed.  Some people get their panties in a wad way too easy and are too fast on the RIC button.

Both extremes kill discussion.

And then we could add to this people who want to rule over this Forum.  They could be the worst thing that happens here but what can we do about it?  Add to this what do we do about people who post truly idiotic things.  How about the entitlement Generation who think LL or the Merchants or the Land Lords owe them something?  It sadly can all be very problematic."

I'd like to see things loosen up here.  I'd like for us to be able to discuss Adult topics without having to resort to PG language. 

When we had the 'Welcome Ebbe Thread' I said to him after we got his attention here (he was posting over in SLU), "Doesn't it seem odd that so many SL discussions are happening over there ratther than in Second Life's Forum."  Either he missed my point or he danced around it.  His reply, paraphrasing here, was, "I'm going to go where I have an audience."

---

This is pretty much precisely what I've been trying to say.  Though I'm less concerned about moderation loosening up than I am with consistency and accountability in the process.

...Dres

---

What we lack here is the "warning shot."

Rather than a moderator popping into a thread and saying "tone the rhetoric down a little,' or, "interpersonal disputes should be taken elsewhere, etc," posts get pulled and suspensions issued.  There's no transparency and little to no chance to correct ones self if we have gotten out of hand.

In a General Discussion Forum that's at least in my opinion the way it should be handled.  Pulling posts and giving people time outs should not occur until after that.

 

[Ted McGregor]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

What we lack here is the "warning shot."

---

You'd nevertheless would always run risk to receive a silenced headshot at the time of a first post from the grassy knoll in front of the Linden trees instead.

I find Theresa's shop analogy the better expectation of how things are eventually managed here.

[Paul Hexem]

I can say from experience that if you argue enough, they will tell you what you did wrong.

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

What we lack here is the "warning shot."

Rather than a moderator popping into a thread and saying "tone the rhetoric down a little,' or, "interpersonal disputes should be taken elsewhere, etc," posts get pulled and suspensions issued.  There's no transparency and little to no chance to correct ones self if we have gotten out of hand.

In a General Discussion Forum that's at least in my opinion the way it should be handled.  Pulling posts and giving people time outs should not occur until after that.

 

---

Seems to me that this would be very effective.  But, I'd be happy if the moderators were simply required to provide you with the specific section of the CG which they think you've violated, instead of just the nebulous, "Your post was in violation of the CG" that they offer now.  At least, that would indicate that they'd actually put some thought into it.

Also, though I understand that this would add quite a bit to their workload, I believe they should be required to actually reply to you if you either ask for further clarification or wish to state your case in order to contest the warning which you've received (in private, of course)... is that really too much to ask?

I get the feeling that the firm which LL hired to provide these moderators is paying the poor fools minimum wage.  You get what you pay for, after all.

...Dres

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

I can say from experience that if you argue enough, they will tell you what you did wrong.

---

You mean they actually reply to you?

...Dres *must be doing something wrong*

[Perrie Juran]

---

TDD123 wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

What we lack here is the "warning shot."

---

You'd nevertheless would always run risk to receive a silenced headshot at the time of a first post from the grassy knoll in front of the Linden trees instead.

I find 

Theresa's shop analogy

the better expectation of how things are eventually managed here.

---

The problem with any analogy is that there is a point where it always breaks down.

The person who has been silently censored may conclude that the Company has taken sides against them.

I can point to some who have posted in this Forum who are convinced that is or was the case.  Some of them quite famously so. 

I'm not advocating that LL allows a free for all here.  I'm just saying that there is an alternative way to handle it when a Thread heats up, one that in the long run would yield much more positive results.

We've lost many voices here because of the childish way Moderation was handled in the past.

[Ted McGregor]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

We've lost many voices here because of the childish way Moderation was handled in the past.

---

There you have it.

That's YOUR loss.

Not theirs.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

What we lack here is the "warning shot."

Rather than a moderator popping into a thread and saying "tone the rhetoric down a little,' or, "interpersonal disputes should be taken elsewhere, etc," posts get pulled and suspensions issued.  There's no transparency and little to no chance to correct ones self if we have gotten out of hand.

In a General Discussion Forum that's at least in my opinion the way it should be handled.  Pulling posts and giving people time outs should not occur until after that.

 

---

Seems to me that this would be very effective.  But, I'd be happy if the moderators were simply required to provide you with the specific section of the CG which they think you've violated, instead of just the nebulous, "Your post was in violation of the CG" that they offer now.  At least, that would indicate that they'd actually put some thought into it.

Also, though I understand that this would add quite a bit to their workload, I believe they should be required to actually reply to you if you either ask for further clarification or wish to state your case in order to contest the warning which you've received (in private, of course)... is that really too much to ask?

I get the feeling that the firm which LL hired to provide these moderators is paying the poor fools minimum wage.  You get what you pay for, after all.

...Dres

---

Well LL really has outsourced 99% of it's support to the lowest bidders:  Us.

What would happen if we all quit answering all the questions that get posted here.  What would happen if we told everyone to file a support ticket with their questions?

Then LL would really get what they are paying for.

[Perrie Juran]

---

TDD123 wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

We've lost many voices here because of the childish way Moderation was handled in the past.

---

There you have it.

That's YOUR loss.

Not theirs.

---

I disagree.  It is their loss.  Because as I replied to Dres, 99% of the support in SL comes from it's Users.  We save then a small fortune.

 

ETA, I should have left the word "We've" out of my statement.  It should have read, "There have been many voices lost here...."  Though being community minded the "we've" would still apply.

[Ted McGregor]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

TDD123 wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

There have been many voices lost here, because of the childish way Moderation was handled in the past.

---

There you have it.

That was their loss and their choice.

Not

Lindenlab

'.

---

I disagree.  It is

their

loss.  Because as I replied to Dres, 99% of the support in SL comes from it's Users.  We save then a small fortune.

---

Ok. We do disagree about that. Sure.

However ... I cannot possibly imagine a job-description which would be appealing enough to applicants, who might be able to actually give 'all of you' what you ask for ( previous posts by you and Dres ), either.

For any applicant it comes down to mental torture by huge amounts of texts, which will always swallow

 

 

    the poor soul(s), requiring and trying to deal with it,

 

whole.

 

 

I will not even touch the required salary or even salaries needed to achieve a moderation like that which is desired to appease the people you miss in here and to control the forum by professionals up to this task.

Lindenlab will never find that worth investing in. I find expecting that investment is too unrealistic to believe in and trying to achieve such investments in threads like these is futile.

Thanks for playing though.

I'm out of the thread.

[Paul Hexem]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

I can say from experience that if you argue enough, they will tell you what you did wrong.

---

You mean they actually reply to you?

...Dres *must be doing something wrong*

---

I PM'ed the **bleep** out of them and came back with alt accounts.

[Trinity Yazimoto]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

We've lost many voices here because of the childish way Moderation was handled in the past.

---

Sorry to pop up here .... As you noticed and some others did, i'm now a "reader only" of this forum. It's not the moderation that made me leave.

It's the constant harrassement i got from trolls about my english language not being enough correct for those ppl for i am entitled to express my opinions in this forum. That was childish too, but was not coming from moderators (althought i had to deal with them sometimes too).That was also really aggressive.

Even if most of those trolls are no longer here, i don't feel to come back in a forum where someone can harrass another person just because their "english level" is not enough correct according to them. 

I found better to do with my time now. and I keep reading the forum, sometimes posting in the merchant or creation forums but that's all. 

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

I've been away since I first posted in this thread. I should not, in fact, have posted at all. There was no need and I should not have injected 'acrimony' of my own into the conversation.  I just (as has been mentioned elsewhere) have a very aggressive response to someone saying 'discuss'.

---

There's no need to apologise for that. As you've seen, you are not the only one who reacts to the instruction "discuss", and I wrote my comments about it before I read yours. To my way of thinking, it's tantamount to a rudeness, and it gets right up my nose. It's the sort of thing that a teacher in authority might say to students, and not the sort of attitude a stanger coming in from the street should adopt.

---

I can understand why some may consider this practice a bit pompous, but, for the life of me, I can't understand why anyone would consider it offensive.

...Dres

---

I don't find it offensive - it doesn't offend me. I just gets up my nose that anyone, let alone a stranger, would even think of giving us instructions 

[Phil Deakins]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

What we lack here is the "warning shot."

Rather than a moderator popping into a thread and saying "tone the rhetoric down a little,' or, "interpersonal disputes should be taken elsewhere, etc," posts get pulled and suspensions issued.  There's no transparency and little to no chance to correct ones self if we have gotten out of hand.

In a General Discussion Forum that's at least in my opinion the way it should be handled.  Pulling posts and giving people time outs should not occur until after that. 

---

That's because there are no moderators for this forum. There are people who have the title 'Moderator', but they aren't moderators; i.e. they don't moderate, or even attempt to moderate..

[Qie Niangao]

---

[...] I just (as has been mentioned elsewhere) have a very aggressive response to someone saying 'discuss'. Most of us would ask something like, "What do you think about this?". Also, the OP is someone I don't care for (I think that started when he invoked Niemoller* in a thread on the Feed [...]

---

Isn't it a universal Internet meme that, at this late date, Niemoller can only be invoked ironically?

For that matter, the same must surely apply to the command to "discuss": It simply must be intended for ironic effect. At least I for one can only hear "discuss" as 

.

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

We've lost many voices here because of the childish way Moderation was handled in the past.

---

Sorry to pop up here .... As you noticed and some others did, i'm now a "reader only" of this forum. It's not the moderation that made me leave.

It's the constant harrassement i got from trolls about my english language not being enough correct for those ppl for i am entitled to express my opinions in this forum. That was childish too, but was not coming from moderators (althought i had to deal with them sometimes too).That was also really aggressive.

Even if most of those trolls are no longer here, i don't feel to come back in a forum where someone can harrass another person just because their "english level" is not enough correct according to them.

---

It is thanks to the moderators here that some complain about that those people who harrassed you are mostly gone.

I'm appreciative of the moderation here - hateful conduct needs to get tossed. People who cannot discuss without being hateful don't need to be here.

People who think you need hate and anger in order to have an engaging conversation - are not the sorts worth having anyway. There are other SL universes out there for such folks.