Re: We need to talk about Shroom.
I've been having a hell of a day so far but this is something I should probably address so here goes:
I simply do not want to deal with this right now, on top of everything else currently happening.
I'd love if this could be resolved simply by reading and understanding, without the need for warnings or bans.
Giving warnings and bans is a pretty unpleasant thing to do, even if they are well deserved and a long time in coming.
I do not want to have an obligation as staff to give warnings or bans just to preserve the last bit of enjoyment around the site.
Hell, I didn't (don't?) even want to be staff. What a life, eh?
But all of this happened, and it's pretty heartfelt. It's pretty clear that a lot of you are of one mind when it comes to Shroom, and I'd like to think I'm man enough to admit when I was wrong... it's pretty much just been me here lately, haha. Of course, I'd like to not be wrong more, but we can't have everything. The point is that something's gotta change, or it will come to warnings and bans (probably bans, honestly, since most of the active site population being extremely unhappy and angry and upset would definitely fall under the "extreme circumstances" necessary to skip prerequisite steps such as a full 3 warnings.
Again, I reeeeaaaaaally do not want to deal with this right now, but if it comes to it, I will. To avoid that, here's my two cents:
"But not if opinions become too similar". I'd like to generalize that part specifically to any community, or subcommunity, staff included. Diversity is important in a great many ways, and I appreciate that it's been noted here- but it seems like we're being asked to have the exact same opinion more frequently than we'd be allowed to have our own diverse opinions. The entire community wasn't single-mindedly calling for a ban a year ago- there was a huge spectrum. Naturally, some were at extreme ends, but most were not... and over the course of that year, almost everyone has slid to the same extreme end. We used to be a pretty diverse and understanding community concerning these things, to the point of allowing back even permabanned members, so it's definitely taken a lot to wear down everyone to this point. There's a certain sort of irony, here.
"reacts accordingly", "spread an attitude that prevents the team from losing alternatives", "feels mature to take a position and 'campaigns', they don't respond negatively immediately". The majority of people in this thread are acting accordingly, as any human being placed in a similar situation would be expected to; and the staff is trying to find a solution that prevents everyone from losing the remainder of the outcomes left to the site. It's a tough job, not made easier by the additional stress of feeling attacked at every opportunity, and as mentioned earlier, maybe I've been the one not reacting accordingly instead. Finally, maturity is something that is hardest to see within yourself- this is why old staff chooses new staff. Because since the dawn of the forums, new staff are chosen based on who is seen as mature not just by themselves, but by the majority. It hasn't always been seamless, god no, but we've been able to refine what qualities we want around the forums and in leadership positions, and which qualities have generally led to disaster. This situation is anything but an immediate response for many people- it's a slow degradation of opinions concerning maturity, tempered over the course of a year.
"appreciate having such external input", "thinks about what is good for EVERYONE". We generally do, and historically have, appreciated external input. To such a great degree that input is still discussed and implemented even if many members would have personal reasons to avoid doing so. We're a smaller community, and therefore it's easier to know every individual member to a degree, so considering the best option for all of us is usually easier than it would be in a much larger community with thousands of members... this thread is what the majority things would be the best move for everyone, and it's been forged in the fires of countless external inputs.
"doesn't punish anybody because of the way they think", "consider punishments when rules are explicitely broken and when their counterpart really behaves bullishly". We typically do try to refrain from punishing for thoughts. A lot of subjects discussed here are seen as controversial, etc. and at times distasteful, but they're just thoughts, just theoretical discussion, and it slides almost always. The problem is when people act on those thoughts- "The state has no place in the bedroom of the nation". Whatever goes on in your mind is entirely yours, but when it takes place in a public place (and especially if it also breaks rules) it affects everyone.
"tries to keep calm in situations of drama", "don't badmouth one targeted person only", "don't use threats of punishments". We were calm to start, mostly at least. But the keyword is "tries". Everyone's tried- all that happened was that some hit their breaking point before others, and after months, that's pretty blameless. A lot of people seem to feel they're the main person being targetted, and I don't think that's a baseless assumption to make for anybody these days. Finally, threats of punishments are only used by staff if there is a very real chance of it actually happening- it's not a threat, just a pseudo-warning before the hammer actually falls.
"nothing to hide", "attitude of showing regular members that their business often is the members' business".We've really tried to push for this lately, to the point of almost outlawing all private communication. Like so many of the other points above, this is not just relevant to staff. If it affects the forums, it affects all of us. This thread is testament to "nothing to hide".
"passion at running the site", "has an attentive eye on the ongoings of the site", "If they notice decreasing activity, they try to react", "give new members a good guiding hand on how to integrate themselves", "they don't continuously pretend like everything's okay the way it is". This is the reason people left staff- no passion, couldn't deal with it anymore. Everyone who's posted so far has an attentive eye on the site, and is currently trying to react to the decreasing activity (specifically the largest and only mass exodus of staff and members alike). We try to give ALL members a hand fitting in with the rest of the community, but sometimes it doesn't work out. And nobody here is pretending things are okay the way they are- if anyone was doing that... Yo. You're looking at him.
Finally, this is a bothersome line. I feel like if you genuinely felt that way, you wouldn't have stuck around so long, but... it's a worrying thing to say regardless. Everyone has their own unique skillsets, and we've been able to manage self-sufficiently because we could determine how to fit together. There's no easy solution to this, but I guess if this is actually 100% what you think... maybe there isn't a solution at all, short of going separate ways.
I wanted to keep this brief (no I didn't, I didn't want to do this at all, I just wanted to play Starbound and not care for a while) but that's gone through the window so... just keep it civil, everyone. I don't want to need to give warnings to anybody, for anything.
I simply do not want to deal with this right now, on top of everything else currently happening.
I'd love if this could be resolved simply by reading and understanding, without the need for warnings or bans.
Giving warnings and bans is a pretty unpleasant thing to do, even if they are well deserved and a long time in coming.
I do not want to have an obligation as staff to give warnings or bans just to preserve the last bit of enjoyment around the site.
Hell, I didn't (don't?) even want to be staff. What a life, eh?
But all of this happened, and it's pretty heartfelt. It's pretty clear that a lot of you are of one mind when it comes to Shroom, and I'd like to think I'm man enough to admit when I was wrong... it's pretty much just been me here lately, haha. Of course, I'd like to not be wrong more, but we can't have everything. The point is that something's gotta change, or it will come to warnings and bans (probably bans, honestly, since most of the active site population being extremely unhappy and angry and upset would definitely fall under the "extreme circumstances" necessary to skip prerequisite steps such as a full 3 warnings.
Again, I reeeeaaaaaally do not want to deal with this right now, but if it comes to it, I will. To avoid that, here's my two cents:
A good staff is a team which is more hold together by competence than just friendship liasons. A good staff also meets its decision on promotion and demotion by these standards. Friendship is good in general, but not if opinions become too similar. (Keyword: no clique building)
"But not if opinions become too similar". I'd like to generalize that part specifically to any community, or subcommunity, staff included. Diversity is important in a great many ways, and I appreciate that it's been noted here- but it seems like we're being asked to have the exact same opinion more frequently than we'd be allowed to have our own diverse opinions. The entire community wasn't single-mindedly calling for a ban a year ago- there was a huge spectrum. Naturally, some were at extreme ends, but most were not... and over the course of that year, almost everyone has slid to the same extreme end. We used to be a pretty diverse and understanding community concerning these things, to the point of allowing back even permabanned members, so it's definitely taken a lot to wear down everyone to this point. There's a certain sort of irony, here.
A good staff reacts accordingly when some of them become inactive, and try to spread an attitude that prevents the team from losing alternatives. They don't try to be as thin as possible by hook or crook. Especially when someone feels mature to take a position and "campaigns", they don't respond negatively immediately. (Keyword: avoiding bottlenecks)
"reacts accordingly", "spread an attitude that prevents the team from losing alternatives", "feels mature to take a position and 'campaigns', they don't respond negatively immediately". The majority of people in this thread are acting accordingly, as any human being placed in a similar situation would be expected to; and the staff is trying to find a solution that prevents everyone from losing the remainder of the outcomes left to the site. It's a tough job, not made easier by the additional stress of feeling attacked at every opportunity, and as mentioned earlier, maybe I've been the one not reacting accordingly instead. Finally, maturity is something that is hardest to see within yourself- this is why old staff chooses new staff. Because since the dawn of the forums, new staff are chosen based on who is seen as mature not just by themselves, but by the majority. It hasn't always been seamless, god no, but we've been able to refine what qualities we want around the forums and in leadership positions, and which qualities have generally led to disaster. This situation is anything but an immediate response for many people- it's a slow degradation of opinions concerning maturity, tempered over the course of a year.
A good staff doesn't work towards a hostile relation to someone who "monitors" them and "knows better" and has own ideas. If anything, they appreciate having such external input and they guess that this guy could go native with them one day. Generally, a good staff thinks about what is good for EVERYONE here and takes care about the wishes of regular members, and they don't just look for what is comfortable for themselves only. (Keyword: ability to criticism, no egoism)
"appreciate having such external input", "thinks about what is good for EVERYONE". We generally do, and historically have, appreciated external input. To such a great degree that input is still discussed and implemented even if many members would have personal reasons to avoid doing so. We're a smaller community, and therefore it's easier to know every individual member to a degree, so considering the best option for all of us is usually easier than it would be in a much larger community with thousands of members... this thread is what the majority things would be the best move for everyone, and it's been forged in the fires of countless external inputs.
A good staff doesn't punish anybody because of the way they think, and because they're unsatisfied with what the staff does and ask for changes (if the upcoming of this isn't already a sign for the staff being bad in fact). They only consider punishments when rules are explicitely broken and when their counterpart really behaves bullishly without showing signs of controlled language. (Keyword: justice)
"doesn't punish anybody because of the way they think", "consider punishments when rules are explicitely broken and when their counterpart really behaves bullishly". We typically do try to refrain from punishing for thoughts. A lot of subjects discussed here are seen as controversial, etc. and at times distasteful, but they're just thoughts, just theoretical discussion, and it slides almost always. The problem is when people act on those thoughts- "The state has no place in the bedroom of the nation". Whatever goes on in your mind is entirely yours, but when it takes place in a public place (and especially if it also breaks rules) it affects everyone.
Furthermore, a good staff tries to keep calm in situations of drama, and they don't throw swearing words all over the place and they don't badmouth one targeted person only (yeah, mostly me and you know who you are) and adding to the previous point, they don't use threats of punishments with the sole intention to muzzle someone (keyword: constructive supremacy instead of power abuse)
"tries to keep calm in situations of drama", "don't badmouth one targeted person only", "don't use threats of punishments". We were calm to start, mostly at least. But the keyword is "tries". Everyone's tried- all that happened was that some hit their breaking point before others, and after months, that's pretty blameless. A lot of people seem to feel they're the main person being targetted, and I don't think that's a baseless assumption to make for anybody these days. Finally, threats of punishments are only used by staff if there is a very real chance of it actually happening- it's not a threat, just a pseudo-warning before the hammer actually falls.
A good staff also has nothing to hide to others, such as that regular members didn't get an idea to why I was demoted in fact or why Suyo left. A good staff has an attitude of showing regular members that their business often is the members' business as well. (keyword: transparency)
"nothing to hide", "attitude of showing regular members that their business often is the members' business".We've really tried to push for this lately, to the point of almost outlawing all private communication. Like so many of the other points above, this is not just relevant to staff. If it affects the forums, it affects all of us. This thread is testament to "nothing to hide".
Most importantly of all this, a good staff has passion at running the site, and has an attentive eye on the ongoings of the site. If they notice decreasing activity, they try to react. They try to make the place interesting and give new members a good guiding hand on how to integrate themselves. ESPECIALLY they don't continuously pretend like everything's okay the way it is and they don't say "we're only here to do the little and mandatory administrative tasks". If they should be slacking, they don't use the always-same phrases like "we're working behind the scenes". (Keyword: defining the job of the staff)
"passion at running the site", "has an attentive eye on the ongoings of the site", "If they notice decreasing activity, they try to react", "give new members a good guiding hand on how to integrate themselves", "they don't continuously pretend like everything's okay the way it is". This is the reason people left staff- no passion, couldn't deal with it anymore. Everyone who's posted so far has an attentive eye on the site, and is currently trying to react to the decreasing activity (specifically the largest and only mass exodus of staff and members alike). We try to give ALL members a hand fitting in with the rest of the community, but sometimes it doesn't work out. And nobody here is pretending things are okay the way they are- if anyone was doing that... Yo. You're looking at him.
Have you ever thought about that my conduct and my intellect might actually be too good for this community?
Finally, this is a bothersome line. I feel like if you genuinely felt that way, you wouldn't have stuck around so long, but... it's a worrying thing to say regardless. Everyone has their own unique skillsets, and we've been able to manage self-sufficiently because we could determine how to fit together. There's no easy solution to this, but I guess if this is actually 100% what you think... maybe there isn't a solution at all, short of going separate ways.
I wanted to keep this brief (no I didn't, I didn't want to do this at all, I just wanted to play Starbound and not care for a while) but that's gone through the window so... just keep it civil, everyone. I don't want to need to give warnings to anybody, for anything.




