- This post by Yoshi Boo 118 was thumbed up by: 4
- ChaosYoshi (August 28th, 2016, 11:03 am) • l.m (August 26th, 2016, 5:45 pm) • Oranjui (August 26th, 2016, 5:23 pm) • Positron (August 26th, 2016, 3:52 pm)
SM63 Level Designer Contest Winner |
Error contacting Twitter | |
Error contacting last.fm |
Cookie |
LL Level Designer Contest Winner |
#4715 wrote:I'm pretty sure there's an unspoken "What happens in the FoA stays in the FoA", but this particular incident involved actual forum drama which lead to an increasing distrust of Shroom's position as site staff, and I feel it's probably best that this kind of information is available to all the active members on the site. Keep in mind, the events below are all said and done, and a lot of things can be really obvious in retrospect. I'm also going to attempt to display none of my personal opinions on the matter and just state what happened.
So, when Shroom became a SR a couple of weeks ago he was also granted access to the FoA. He made a thread titled "Peter told me to lock myself in a thread", which was a locked thread as the title suggested. Later Raz unlocked Shroom's topic, and people started posting in it. Shroom then left a user note on Raz saying:
""Please stop unlocking my FoA topic. It has origined from Peter's funny statement on chat ("Can you lock yourself in a topic", reaction after screenie: "gg Shroom") and wasn't supposed to be more. Now, a few posts later, I've decided to lock it for real. Thanks for your cooperation.""
And then Raz responded with one saying:
"i'm sorry my lord, I'll be more considerate of the fact that you want everything to go your way in the future, even in a forum where nothing matters."
Keep in mind, this is the FoA and it's generally well known that we all ♥♥♥♥ with each other there. This lead to Shroom creating a post called "A new FoA etiquette" in the FoA, which read as follows:Supershroom wrote:You know. This secret subforum is made for ♥♥♥♥. And you guys think you can differ between ♥♥♥♥ and spamming. Well, here are some rules telling what should be avoided.
- Do not make mock on any other people's cost. I know that this also includes a fine line. If a user is not amused about what's going on, try to respect that. If a user thinks his own topic can be locked, respect that as well.
- No complete, utter spam topics like "my neck", "my back" ... or 3 times "shut the ♥♥♥♥ up". No redundant stuff and no "wind-up" titles. Generally, better have one topic for several ♥♥♥♥ stuff than several needless topics.
- Try to avoid being completely off-topic (at least on the topics which have a topic).
- No smile abuse neither, unless it's something witty like "Can you find the Doram". Also no abuse of caps and no extremely noobish language.
- No more nonsense actions please like making everything an announcement or flooding thumbs up a la Bryce. This usually leaves a not-so-good aftertaste.
- If you desperately want to satisfy your ♥♥♥♥ urge in a new topic, try to make something funny or original. Certain ITT's or things like "ban request for Doram" are funny, but the things e.g. mentioned in Rule 2 are not funny at all.
- Lastly, no more postcount here for the members who have it, that's just unfair. Either have it for all or for noone, but it obviously tends to be "for noone". Probably a glomod will have to enforce this.
So, discuss if you want, and remember that this is for everyone's benefit, like the real Forum Rules are. This means no ♥♥♥♥ in this topic, thank you.
There was no prior discussion of these rules, neither with staff or normal members. These rules were just posted by Shroom without warning an expected to be followed. It's also worth noting again that Shroom had only been in the FoA for a couple of weeks, and there had never been a complaint over anything Shroom tried to change through his rules beforehand by any other members.
OJ replied with a sarcastic post similar Raz's:Oranjui wrote:Oh, please excuse me, m'lord. I was unaware this forum placed such restrictions on content. Henceforth I shall submit only ♥♥♥♥ of the absolute highest caliber, and be sure to report the actions of any young hooligans polluting the place with their senseless frivolity!
Also:
B a n n e d
At this point I'm going to start skipping some posts because a lot of them just reiterate points already made. I responded to the topic saying:Bamsmarck wrote:My previous post so it's all in one place: show
Alright, so I already explained my opinion on imposing rules like this, but since this thread was specifically unlocked I may as well explain why I disagree with each of these rules specifically.
I’m going to say things like “we”, but keep in mind this is all just my opinion. I’m just assuming things based on how people pretty much always act or how they reacted to particular scenarios.
1. We pretty much do that all the time, especially on Discord, and the majority of the time everyone is okay with it and takes it as a joke. I agree that if someone is feels attacked and asks you to stop, you should. However, I'm going to acknowledge the fact that you clearly made this rule because you felt like you were being bullied. I’m going to post our PM conversation for a bit more backing as to what I’m about to say.Spoiler: show
It’s like I said, I think you took the whole thing way too seriously. It’s fine if you feel harassed and we should respect that, but if that’s what you consider harassment, the FoA isn’t the place for you.
2. Most people consider spam to be "anjhfuiaufdghnaifghsafg". Sure, the posts you listed are "low effort posts", but that’s what the FoA is. Plus, who are you to decide what counts as an actual comedic post and what isn't.
3. It's the FoA. I'm sorry, but that's the way it is, there's really not anything else I can say.
4. Literally nobody else complained. Like I said, people aren't just going to conform to your standards.
5. Yeah, I sort of get how this could be annoying to someone, but again, nobody made a serious complaint.
6. Again, who are you to decide what counts as actual comedy and what isn't.
7. I'm sure that a few people besides just you care about post count, but a bunch of us don't. So this rule can be either way and I'm sure a large sum of us wouldn't care. That being said, it's still kind of weird to me to impose rules that a lot of us would consider arbitrary.
In general: One of my big issues here is that you didn't even talk to anyone else (to my knowledge) if they agreed with these rules, not even the staff. I do think that sometimes the staff should just go ahead and enact a change if discussion is taking far too long and the change is really needed, but no discussion happened and these rules aren’t vital. It’s like I said over and over, this is the FoA and nobody except you complained. You can't just impose major changes on people because your feelings were hurt. I don’t want to sound like I'm saying “Just quit the FoA, you don’t belong here”, because I'm not, but if you can’t handle something as minor as this, you’re not going to have a good time here.
Also, just giving more backing for my stance on rule 1 for non-FoA members, there isn't any intentional flaming or harassment in the FoA. There are a lot of friendly jabs towards other FoA members, but nothing legitimately intended to harm another person.
Doram made a post saying that the FoA provided an outlet for people to let a bit looser than normal, which prompted Shroom to respond:Supershroom wrote:I probably wasn't clear enough once again.
I didn't intend to disparage the entire culture here. I've scrolled through some earlier pages while writing the OP and some of them I've found to be hilarious indeed, like the few ones that I also mentioned, but some others of them where really too ridiculous. The suggestions aim at the FoA culture being lived in a slightly more controlled and less unrestrained way. That's what it aimes at - no extreme noobishness or excessive language, no abuse of caps and smilies, no over-exaggerative behaviour. Really, it should be possible to let out your hilarity and silliness in not-so-extreme ways. Most FoA topics comply with my suggestions, a few however don't.
And if you really are this conservative and want to keep this as a place with unlimited tomfoolery and without any inhibition level, then ♥♥♥♥ it, let me go out. Then I know for sure that I don't want to identify myself with that and then I don't want to be stressed with that any more before further damage happens.
I was typing up a post before Shroom made the one I just put above, but that ended up being sent after because I took to long ♥♥♥♥ around with wording:Bamsmarck wrote:Trying to be as unbiased as humanly possible, I'd like to voice a complaint specifically to you, Shroom. I do want to see everyone succeed, including you. That being said, this incident kind of made me concerned for you as a staff member. I'm not saying you should be immediately demoted or anything, but I think it's important for you to communicate with actual forum members before trying to create strict rules on a subforum you've only been in for a few weeks. The whole decision just felt rash to me. I'm just saying this because I do want to see you be the best staff member you can be, but the way you handled this situation made me question your authority as staff.
A few posts later Raz replied to Shroom's topic:Raz wrote:My answer is no.
You know why I was annoyed, why I was ruder than usual in that user note (a user note mind you, a completely useless thing that you could've just PM'd me about)? You became a site rep, and something immediately didn't go your way in the FoA, so you feel the need that a forum that has existed for almost all of runouw's existance without problems suddenly needs restrictions cause you experienced something not going your way in the forum.
Then you go and post rules, without talking to any of the staff, the users, and act like that's okay. No, that's not how a site rep works. If you're going to be a site rep, you need to take into account the opinions of the users, that's kinda in the names, and also take into account with the staff. That's also the other part of the job, you're supposed to discuss and decide on new ideas with us. If you think that being a staff member means that now everything TRULY goes your way, then you might want to reconsider being a staff member.
And yes, I am rude and I am blunt. But I'm gonna give myself credit here and say that I'm really not normally very rude to everyone here, maybe I'll post a song lyric with obscene lyric in it and someone takes it the wrong way, but I can't think of many other times where I've insulted someone seriously at all. It's when I see something that frustrates me such as a repeated problem, is where it really bothers me. (those are just recent things that come to mind)
EDIT: and don't bring up Suyo's rules again. We all (maybe not you) know they're irrelevant. The only rule that really does apply here is to not flame, which has not happened.
Shortly afterwards Shroom asked to be removed from the FoA. My current knowledge of the situation is that Shroom is going to be given one more chance, but after that he'll be immediately demoted of his rank as staff.
Runouw Votes Winner |
Brando wrote:I guess zombie movies are realistic. People spend a frustratingly long time refusing to admit monsters exist, and by the time they're finally ready to decapitate their zombie friends, the Shroom zombie has already killed the forums.
Error contacting Twitter |
Razzian Fighter |
Cookie |
Error contacting Twitter |
Winter |