# Is there going to be some sort of follow up with our friends from yesterday



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Feb 1, 2011)

THIS IS NOT A CONTINUATION OF THE MISERABLE USERS THREAD. IF YOU WANT TO POINT FINGERS AND CALL PEOPLE DOODOOHEADS, PLEASE FUCK OFF. YOU ARE THE KIND OF PEOPLE WHO GET THESE THREADS LOCKED. 

Okay, now that we got that out of the way.

From what I gather, we got rid of the miserable usermask and reverted Clayton's infraction, then the thread got locked because the issue was fixed. What happens with the people who did shit? Do we give them a swat on the hand and let them go back to work? Nothing prevents people from taking more horrible decisions, and I doubt these people will be particularly influenced by another minor loss of public credit among ten or twenty forum users.

I'm hearing that we're already taking more steps to ban Accountability accountability-like accounts, by introducing a new rule on proxies. What the shit, man?


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

I'm guessing they get to keep doing whatever they want.


----------



## Monster. (Feb 1, 2011)

I'm gonna take a shot in the dark and say that there will be no reprimanding of any kind other than a smack on the wrist. That's about it.

But really, is anyone surprised?

This is random, but I still think that Ratte is put in charge or has a bigger part in the running of  FAF. She at least is an honest person and does her best regardless of the strain of her position as an admin. Can't say the same for the others...okay, well, Browder and Qoph aren't bad admins mods either.


----------



## Aden (Feb 1, 2011)

Yeah I hate you too >:V


----------



## Monster. (Feb 1, 2011)

Aden said:


> Yeah I hate you too >:V


 
...Dude, I always forget about you because your name isn't in bold black or blue. :C You know I loooove you too~


----------



## Zaraphayx (Feb 1, 2011)

Ratte is young and has enough responsibilities already without having to cover for the rest of the staff's inadequacies. 

It is a goddamn shame that she's shown the most maturity in the given situation though, I guess manchild stereotypes of furries aren't exactly far from the mark.

And to be fair the forum moderators aren't really the people responsible for this, it was just Carenath being a dick with forum plugins.


----------



## Monster. (Feb 1, 2011)

Zaraphayx said:


> Ratte is young and has enough responsibilities already without having to cover for the rest of the staff's inadequacies.
> 
> It is a goddamn shame that she's shown the most maturity in the given situation though, I guess manchild stereotypes of furries aren't exactly far from the mark.


Good point. :/ I wouldn't wanna put that kind of responsibility on her, no matter how ridiculous things were getting. It's such a _shame_...


----------



## AshleyAshes (Feb 1, 2011)

To quote a certian Admin's FA profile...



> I value Honour, Honesty and Loyalty.


 
And it also says...



> I don't like hypocrites.


 
...So uhh... That would mean... Well, I guess it doesn't have to be said.


----------



## Qoph (Feb 1, 2011)

Clayton's infraction was reversed less than an hour after it occurred back in November.  We didn't just reverse it when he brought it up there, it was already a thing of the past.

Also, both Browder and I are just mods.


----------



## Zaraphayx (Feb 1, 2011)

AshleyAshes said:


> To quote a certian Admin's FA profile...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Carenath hates himself?


----------



## CerbrusNL (Feb 1, 2011)

Gaz said:


> This is random, but I still think that Ratte is put in charge or has a bigger part in the running of  FA[1]
> Browder and Qoph aren't bad admins either.[2]


 [1] I suppose you mean FAF?
[2] Moderators, not admins 

And, yea, 'bout Clayton's infraction: Yup, I was a dick in the infraction reason, but that was about 3 months ago (6th of September 2010), and it was reverted exactly 53 minutes after the infraction was handed out. He was just digging up ancient history.

That settled, let's not ignore the OP's first paragraph.


----------



## Monster. (Feb 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> [1] I suppose you mean FAF?
> [2] Moderators, not admins
> 
> That settled, let's not ignore the OP's first paragraph.


 I probably did; I haven't slept. My bad. I think I fixed the "Admins" already, too.


----------



## Ratte (Feb 1, 2011)

I'm only a mainsite admin.  I'm just a supermod here.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Feb 1, 2011)

Ratte said:


> I'm only a mainsite admin.  I'm just a supermod here.


 Eh, yea, that's what I meant to say, actually -.-
Smod on FAF, and new admin on FA, right?


----------



## AshleyAshes (Feb 1, 2011)

I have to ask, what's wrong with the user named Accountability? His posts are polite, thought out and well worded. The only thing he does 'wrong' is that he challenges FA in an expectation that it's staff be _accountable_. Why are FA's admins apparently so threatened by this and seek to find out his identity or stop him from posting?


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Feb 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> [1] I suppose you mean FAF?
> [2] Moderators, not admins
> 
> And, yea, 'bout Clayton's infraction: Yup, I was a dick in the infraction reason, but that was about 3 months ago (6th of September 2010), and it was reverted exactly 53 minutes after the infraction was handed out. He was just digging up ancient history.
> ...


Yep. So let's talk about why this kind of shit is reverted but not punished.

When Ben was doing "stupid" shit (clearly abusing the forum system, no matter how pure his intents were) which was quite similar to the situation we had yesterday, action was quickly taken to remove him entirely from the staff. (and Ben was trying to ban grammatically wronged manchildren and bad trolls faster, not sneakily silence whistleblower accounts)

And here? Wait, what here? I don't see any problems.


----------



## SkieFire (Feb 1, 2011)

Outright banning proxies seems silly, but of course they do get abused to get around bans.

I know of other forums that simply require multiple users, who may be on the same IP or using a proxy service, to actually inform an admin that they aren't the same person but have to use the same connection for whatever reason. If one of them gets banned then their ip is banned their friend on the other account gets to punch them for getting them banned too. That way you can white-list legitimately used ip's with multiple users and still purge ones that haven't come forward.


----------



## Ratte (Feb 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> Eh, yea, that's what I meant to say, actually -.-
> Smod on FAF, and new admin on FA, right?


 
Something like that.

When I get home at about 3ish CST I'll see what's going on a little better than now, since I'm currently on lunch at school.


----------



## redfoxnudetoons (Feb 1, 2011)

AshleyAshes said:


> I have to ask, what's wrong with the user named Accountability? His posts are polite, thought out and well worded. The only thing he does 'wrong' is that he challenges FA in an expectation that it's staff be _accountable_. Why are FA's admins apparently so threatened by this and seek to find out his identity or stop him from posting?


 
That's exactly the problem. Some users are trying to make staff own up for their actions, or lack there of. The problem is the people keep getting banned for it to shut up those who don't asspat the lies and misdirection and empty promises.


----------



## Smelge (Feb 1, 2011)

redfoxnudetoons said:


> That's exactly the problem. Some users are trying to make staff own up for their actions, or lack there of. The problem is the people keep getting banned for it to shut up those who don't asspat the lies and misdirection and empty promises.


 
You mean "People who seem to come here specifically to complain about the site, while not actually using it for anything else"? Fair enough if all these people actually did something else around the site, but they seem to be here specifically to tell everyone how bad the site is.

And I think you'll find the reason Rossyfox and Accountability were on that list, is because Rossyfox went and answered an accountability post as if he was accountability, but using the wrong account. now, seeing as accountability has been using proxies to hide who it is, and Rossy went and answered, it's suspiciously like he went and was logged in to the wrong account right there.

Seems the most likely reason.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Feb 1, 2011)

Smelge said:


> You mean "People who seem to come here specifically to complain about the site, while not actually using it for anything else"? Fair enough if all these people actually did something else around the site, but they seem to be here specifically to tell everyone how bad the site is.
> 
> And I think you'll find the reason Rossyfox and Accountability were on that list, is because Rossyfox went and answered an accountability post as if he was accountability, but using the wrong account. now, seeing as accountability has been using proxies to hide who it is, and Rossy went and answered, it's suspiciously like he went and was logged in to the wrong account right there.
> 
> Seems the most likely reason.


 o 
 Doesn't that solve the issue you're bringing up just now? These people aren't contributing to the site because they're ads of people who don't want to risk their own balls being silenced themselves for bitching.
(I'm also suspecting some have been banned for completely retarded reasons, and are unable to post from their main.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

AshleyAshes said:


> I have to ask, what's wrong with the user named Accountability? His posts are polite, thought out and well worded. The only thing he does 'wrong' is that he challenges FA in an expectation that it's staff be _accountable_. Why are FA's admins apparently so threatened by this and seek to find out his identity or stop him from posting?


 Yeah it's getting ridiculous, is it just me or are infractions more severe towards people who question how 'neer runs the site?
On FaF you can be a asshole all you want, just wait till your last infraction goes away and go back to your old self; but if you bring up questions about the site it's goto jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
If you ask me there needs to be a complete overhaul on how Fa/FaF does banning, cause as it is right now it seems to be arbitrary how they ban people.  Carenth retroactively changed the rules to try and ban accountability, no matter what your reasoning is changing the rules after someone gets infracted to shove them out the door is just utterly fucked up.


tl;dr Fa & FaF needs to completely overhaul how they ban/infract to take out the ability of admins/mods to use their poorly defined admin/mod powers to punish those they don't like.


----------



## Grendel (Feb 1, 2011)

Did anyone read Carenath's Twitter page?
The one where he said "For those saying I should resign, FUCK YOU" ? Ah, but then he deleted it and used a wonderful backpedal.


----------



## Nocturne (Feb 1, 2011)

The main issue here is jsut plain accountability, the concept not the user.

I haven't seen in palce any sort of system for mod suspension.  Carenath acted in bad faith beyond the scope of his position and should at the least be given a suspension of moderator powers.


But oh wait, he's a coder we can't make him mad.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Grendel said:


> Did anyone read Carenath's Twitter page?
> The one where he said "For those saying I should resign, FUCK YOU" ? Ah, but then he deleted it and used a wonderful backpedal.


 Just because he deletes it doesn't mean anyone is going to forget it, sometimes I wonder if he thinks deleting something also deletes the memory of it from the user's brain?

Staff members you may want to look into having the site itself ban people, like have a applet that calculates out how many active infractions someone has and once it gets to a certain number then it'll ban the person.


Nocturne said:


> The main issue here is jsut plain accountability, the concept not the user.
> I  haven't seen in palce any sort of system for mod suspension.  Carenath  acted in bad faith beyond the scope of his position and should at the  least be given a suspension of moderator powers.
> But oh wait, he's a coder we can't make him mad.


They should atleast take away his ability to infract/ban users for a extended period of time.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Feb 1, 2011)

Nocturne: Carenath is not actually a coder, but the forum host, iirc.
CF: what amount of infraction points would you suggest then?


----------



## Willow (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Staff members you may want to look into having the site itself ban people, like have a applet that calculates out how many active infractions someone has and once it gets to a certain number then it'll ban the person.


 I think they already do that :|


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> Nocturne: Carenath is not actually a coder, but the forum host, iirc.
> CF: what amount of infraction points would you suggest then?


 Anything that isn't totally arbitrary is welcomed.
Right now the ability to ban people without any sort of guesstimate of a number poorly defines mods/admins powers, right now it's so poorly defined that someone could go, "Oh 1 infraction... Hmm I don't like this guy... BAN!"
tl;dr anything that isn't arbitrary.


Willow said:


> I think they already do that :|


For spammers and that.


----------



## Aden (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> For spammers and that.


 
If you're talking about the forums, a temp-ban is automatically given by the forum software once three active infraction points are reached
not sure if a permaban is automatic or not


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Aden said:


> If you're talking about the forums, a temp-ban is automatically given by the forum software once three active infraction points are reached
> not sure if a permaban is automatic or not


There should be one for permabans.


----------



## Willow (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> For spammers and that.


 I thought that's what the tier system was basically. You get so many infractions for each temp ban and after 3 you're permabanned. 

Spammers get some special infraction that permabans them automatically.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Feb 1, 2011)

Aden said:


> If you're talking about the forums, a temp-ban is automatically given by the forum software once three active infraction points are reached
> not sure if a permaban is automatic or not


 
Should be after three cumulated temp bans (they don't expire).
We're delving off topic once again, and no extra info on what happens with carenath seems to be coming.


----------



## Xenke (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> There should be one for permabans.


 
So, you'd rather have permabans be determined by an emotionless set of standards and requirements?

No appeals? No reconsideration? No moved up permaban for people who really should be banned?


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Willow said:


> I thought that's what the tier system was basically. You get so many infractions for each temp ban and after 3 you're permabanned.
> 
> Spammers get some special infraction that permabans them automatically.


 Then how do you explain the fiasco yesterday?
Accountability was banned for bringing up issues with the site, if someone is going to get banned for that atleast put it in the forum rules.


Xenke said:


> So, you'd rather have permabans be determined by an emotionless set of standards and requirements?
> 
> No appeals? No reconsideration? No moved up permaban for people who really should be banned?


I'd be better than having people pull dick moves and ragepermabanning people to shut them up.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Feb 1, 2011)

The problem is having the software ban a user after 3 temp bans, from what I understand of it, that's hard, if not impossible to do with the way the current forum software recognises infraction points.
That aside, those perm. bans are usually discussed on the staff forums, and manually executed, unless the user's been given another chance (After a temp ban?).


----------



## Xenke (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I'd be better than having people pull dick moves and ragepermabanning people to shut them up.


 
On the flip side though, people who really have no business being permabanned could get permabanned due to technicality.

Maybe it's just because I look at things differently and I understand them, but I think the subjective system works better _with the appropriate mix of people who control it_.

Forum feels more alive than a machine.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Feb 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> On the flip side though, people who really have no business being permabanned could get permabanned due to technicality.
> 
> Maybe it's just because I look at things differently and I understand them, but I think the subjective system works better _with the appropriate mix of people who control it_.
> 
> Forum feels more alive than a machine.


 People don't have to answer to that.
They just make up bullshit reasons, and while people completely understand such user has been banned for such reason, there really isn't anything they can do but wait at the gates of castle furaffinity for a herald that will never come.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> On the flip side though, people who really have no business being permabanned could get permabanned due to technicality.
> Maybe it's just because I look at things differently and I understand them, but I think the subjective system works better _with the appropriate mix of people who control it_.
> Forum feels more alive than a machine.


 On the flip side of that we could have people doing whatever they want without any sort of accountability.  Seriously for fucking sakes staff atleast take about carenth's ability to ban/infract for a period of time.  He's outright proven he can't handle having that power without horribly misusing it.


CerbrusNL said:


> bans are usually discussed on the staff forums


 Apparently not, half the staff knew as much as we did when the shit hit the fan and then the staff iirc was shut down, the thread was locked twice, the users were ragebanned, the group hidden.  What about that sounds like a discussion?  He can't handle being a admin if he swings the fact he owns the server around to fuck with the other staff members.  Do you honestly trust him?


----------



## Xenke (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> On the flip side of that we could have people doing whatever they want without any sort of accountability.  Seriously for fucking sakes staff atleast take about carenth's ability to ban/infract for a period of time.  He's outright proven he can't handle having that power without horribly misusing it.


 
Yes, we know. Blah blah blah. You haven't shut up about it since you found out.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Apparently not, half the staff knew as much as we did when the shit hit the fan and then the staff iirc was shut down, the thread was locked twice, the users were ragebanned, the group hidden.  What about that sounds like a discussion?  He can't handle being a admin if he swings the fact he owns the server around to fuck with the other staff members.  Do you honestly trust him?


 That sounds to me like a bit of a callout.

I don't know who did the terrible handling, (although there's no reason to point fingers at Carenath), but it's pretty clear this is an instance of petty adminfits.
Users being banned for clearly valid, yet contestable reasons are a completely different issue altogether.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

ElizabethAlexandraMary said:


> Users being banned for clearly valid, yet contestable reasons are a completely different issue altogether.


 I won't argue with you there if someone has been banned for clearcut rulebreaking, then yes it was justified.
There needs to be a complete overhaul on how the staff conducts themselves, so that no one regardless of who they are are above the rules.


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> then the staff iirc was shut down


 
To clarify it wasn't.  It was called 'dead' because no one had any information to report at the time.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> To clarify it wasn't.  It was called 'dead' because no one had any information to report at the time.


 Okay.

Here's my problem, the forum rules are not a guideline, it is doctrine and nobody not even dragoneer himself should be above it.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Okay.
> 
> Here's my problem, the forum rules are not a guideline, it is doctrine and nobody not even dragoneer himself should be above it.


 Of course, they're not enforced properly sometimes.
Ironically, there's not really any forum rules for mods/admins (if they are, I'm not aware of them, although I think I've heard some people mention before they operate mostly on principles, "common sense" (whatever that is) and nonspoken rules). We end up in grey areas, where staff must choose how to deal with issues on a case-by-case basis, sometimes in a completely decent way, some other times not.

Because of this, we end up with completely stupid shit like Ben being blackmailed with a ban if he ever spreads some info about a particular person. (The reason for this being what, preventing mods from having to deal with an inpending shitstorm following release? Of course the info is bad dirt, then. And coincidentally, the request for a lesser workload also happens to protect the person.)


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Okay.
> 
> Here's my problem, the forum rules are not a guideline, it is doctrine and nobody not even dragoneer himself should be above it.


 
Dude, this isn't a forum rules things. I thing everything that happened was technically within forum rules as it was supported by forum software. It's an ethics thing. My unofficial view.

But honestly I'm the wrong person to ask about this. I just corrected you about the IRC because I don't want to give the impression we weren't unable to communicate with one another. It was just that there was nothing to say.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> Dude, this isn't a forum rules things. I thing everything that happened was technically within forum rules as it was supported by forum software. It's an ethics thing. My unofficial view.
> But honestly I'm the wrong person to ask about this. I just corrected you about the IRC because I don't want to give the impression we weren't unable to communicate with one another. It was just that there was nothing to say.


 The forum rules were retroactively changed in order to ban someone, that isn't just a abuse of power, that is tearing up the forum rules and then taking a piss on them.
If you ask me they need to add in that rules can not under any circumstance be retroactive.


----------



## Draconas (Feb 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> Nocturne: Carenath is not actually a coder, but the forum host, iirc.
> CF: what amount of infraction points would you suggest then?


 
may i suggest a number? im thinking 5, its not too much, its not too little IMO


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

Cannonfodder, you should just stop posting in these threads. You only serve to further confuse uneducated people with your baseless rambling. You never have anything to say that isn't either: 1) A random callout/accusation or 2)Complete speculation that you're trying to push off as fact. Please do the less informed users a favor and not post unless you have something constructive to add. 

As for the topic, I doubt there will be any/many consequences for Carenath. He made a dumb decision, but FAF seems to be pretty lenient on those and wouldn't risk causing even more drama by severely punishing him for an event that, while significant, wasn't anything catastrophic. Especially since he's an established _admin_ and not just a mod or something, combined with the fact that I'm sure the users that were punished by this don't really matter to the staff at all. That's just my opinion though.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Feb 1, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> As for the topic, I doubt there will be any/many consequences for Carenath. He made a dumb decision, but FAF seems to be pretty lenient on those and wouldn't risk causing even more drama by severely punishing him for an event that, while significant, wasn't anything catastrophic. Especially since he's an established _admin_ and not just a mod or something, combined with the fact that I'm sure the users that were punished by this don't really matter to the staff at all. That's just my opinion though.


 What I don't like is that they were quick to get Ben out.
When someone works against the staff, out with the whole thing. And when the userbase is targeted, nobody will even bother to move a finger.
(That's all speaking about FAF being lenient on bad decisions, of course)


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> Cannonfodder, you should just stop posting in these threads. You only serve to further confuse uneducated people with your baseless rambling. You never have anything to say that isn't either: 1) A random callout/accusation or 2)Complete speculation that you're trying to push off as fact. Please do the less informed users a favor and not post unless you have something constructive to add.
> As for the topic, I doubt there will be any/many consequences for Carenath. He made a dumb decision, but FAF seems to be pretty lenient on those and wouldn't risk causing even more drama by severely punishing him for an event that, while significant, wasn't anything catastrophic. Especially since he's an established _admin_ and not just a mod or something, combined with the fact that I'm sure the users that were punished by this don't really matter to the staff at all. That's just my opinion though.


 Jashwa I've come to expect you never agreeing with me.  If you expect me to agree with you just cause you have the most post counts you are wrong.
He admitted he installed the applet, how is that speculation?  The forum rules were changed just to ban someone.
I will admit what happened didn't violate the rules, but if the rules can be changed at will to ban someone a person doesn't like then why have the forum rules in the first place?
No one should be untouchable.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Feb 1, 2011)

Draconas said:


> may i suggest a number? im thinking 5, its not too much, its not too little IMO


Now, imagine you have a list of all forum regulars, how many would have to be instantly banned, right now, would you think?


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> Now, imagine you have a list of all forum regulars, how many would have to be instantly banned, right now, would you think?


 What about atleast having rules not being retroactive?


----------



## Xenke (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Jashwa I've come to expect you never agreeing with me.  If you expect me to agree with you just cause you have the most post counts you are wrong.
> He admitted he installed the applet, how is that speculation?  The forum rules were changed just to ban someone.
> I will admit what happened didn't violate the rules, but if the rules can be changed at will to ban someone a person doesn't like then why have the forum rules in the first place?
> No one should be untouchable.


 
He's talking about crap like this (I'm sure):



CannonFodder said:


> Yeah it's getting ridiculous, is it just me or are infractions more severe towards people who question how 'neer runs the site?



No, they aren't. You're just a reactionary dumbass. I'm sure if you watched someone kill a kitten right now you'd go on and on about how people think it's cool to kill kittens, and about how the police sanction it, and about how everyone else must be doing this.



CannonFodder said:


> 'cause as it is right now it seems to be arbitrary how they ban people.



Even if I agreed with the pattern you try to define in this exact same post, pointing out a pattern and then saying that there is no pattern is pretty retarded.



CannonFodder said:


> Carenth retroactively changed the rules to try and ban accountability, no matter what your reasoning is changing the rules after someone gets infracted to shove them out the door is just utterly fucked up.



Which rules? About the proxy thing? Regardless if it was made up on the spot, it _is_ something that needs to be addressed. I'm actually surprised they didn't have something in place for that already.



CannonFodder said:


> Anything that isn't totally arbitrary is welcomed.
> Right now the ability to ban people without any sort of guesstimate of a number poorly defines mods/admins powers, right now it's so poorly defined that someone could go, "Oh 1 infraction... Hmm I don't like this guy... BAN!"



Except for you know that doesn't happen in a great majority of the cases, you retard. As other mods have been saying, bans are discussed among the moderation team. In the case where someone does go over other peoples heads and do it because they want to, the ban is usually overturned. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.



CannonFodder said:


> Here's my problem, the forum rules are not a guideline, it is doctrine and nobody not even dragoneer himself should be above it.



So the person who runs the site has to abide by rules he writes (or at least approves) and can change at anytime? Gee, that's so restricting. Furthermore, stop trying to drag Dragoneer into play again.



CannonFodder said:


> What about atleast having rules not being retroactive?



YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THIS.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> He's talking about crap like this (I'm sure):
> No, they aren't. You're just a reactionary dumbass. I'm sure if you watched someone kill a kitten right now you'd go on and on about how people think it's cool to kill kittens, and about how the police sanction it, and about how everyone else must be doing this.
> Even if I agreed with the pattern you try to define in this exact same post, pointing out a pattern and then saying that there is no pattern is pretty retarded.
> Which rules? About the proxy thing? Regardless if it was made up on the spot, it _is_ something that needs to be addressed. I'm actually surprised they didn't have something in place for that already.
> ...


 Explain how come accountability got so many infractions then?
No what I'm getting at is that questioning how the site is run is more likely to get you infracted.
Regardless the rule was made to retroactively ban someone.
Ratte overturned the ban, carenth banned him without discussion.
I know having the admins/mods follow the rules isn't very restricting, but using your argument they mine as well just toss the rules out the window.
And yet it hasn't been address by ANY of the staff.

How any site should be run:
The law of the land -> The rules -> Site owner -> Senior admin -> Admins -> Supermod -> Mod -> Users


----------



## CerbrusNL (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> What about atleast having rules not being retroactive?


 Then we'd have to wipe all infraction points out of the infraction history. I don't see that happening any time soon.
Also, added a little poll 'bout infraction point counts:
http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/90950-Infraction-Points.


----------



## Rossyfox (Feb 1, 2011)

Smelge said:


> You mean "People who seem to come here specifically to complain about the site, while not actually using it for anything else"? Fair enough if all these people actually did something else around the site, but they seem to be here specifically to tell everyone how bad the site is.
> 
> And I think you'll find the reason Rossyfox and Accountability were on that list, is because Rossyfox went and answered an accountability post as if he was accountability, but using the wrong account. now, seeing as accountability has been using proxies to hide who it is, and Rossy went and answered, it's suspiciously like he went and was logged in to the wrong account right there.
> 
> Seems the most likely reason.


 
Why on earth would I create an alternate account to criticise FA when I am quite happy to criticise FA openly? I am already heavily disliked by the staff for being critical, there would be no point in me hiding it.

I replied to a post you wrote in which you addressed Accountability, yes. I did so because, guess what, this is a public forum, and anyone can reply to anyone else if they feel they have something relevant to say. I felt I wanted to reply to the point you were making, so I did.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> Then we'd have to wipe all infraction points out of the infraction history. I don't see that happening any time soon.
> Also, added a little poll 'bout infraction point counts:
> http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/90950-Infraction-Points.


 I was referring to if there's a new rule you can't infract someone for doing that before the rule was made.
Let's say there's a new rule saying users can't have the word "ass" in their username, now if the rules weren't retroactive you wouldn't be able to infract someone with the username "assninja" who registered six months ago.


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Jashwa I've come to expect you never agreeing with me.  If you expect me to agree with you just cause you have the most post counts you are wrong.


How about you try listening to what I have to say and not just assuming that I'm trying to exert my massive e peen powers on you? 




			
				CannonFodder said:
			
		

> He admitted he installed the applet, how is that speculation?  The forum rules were changed just to ban someone.
> I will admit what happened didn't violate the rules, but if the rules can be changed at will to ban someone a person doesn't like then why have the forum rules in the first place?
> No one should be untouchable.


 I was talking about shit like this:



CannonFodder said:


> Apparently not, half the staff knew as  much as we did when the shit hit the fan and then the staff iirc was  shut down, the thread was locked twice, the users were ragebanned, the  group hidden.  What about that sounds like a discussion?  He can't  handle being a admin if he swings the fact he owns the server around to  fuck with the other staff members.  Do you honestly trust him?



Where you were wrong about pretty much everything and just attacking Carenath and making incorrect generalizations and insults based on one incident. One incident is not a pattern and is no reason to de-admin someone. 

I was also talking about everything Xenke said, including probably >half your posts in the miserable users thread. You just kept posting over and over again about how "IT MUST BE DRAGONEER OR ARSHES NO ONE ELSE COULD DO IT IT'S DRAGONEER. 'NEER. 'NEER! 'NEER! THEY'RE ALL HORRRIBLE", along with forcing other people to waste time and effort correcting everything you said that was wrong. 

I'm not telling you that you're not allowed to have an opinion as much as any of the rest of us, but just state "Look, I think x." and let it go and not run around like a retarded conspiracy theorist making claims off of no evidence because you want them to support your conclusion. Just post once or twice and let it go, no need to repeat yourself a thousand times.



ElizabethAlexandraMary said:


> What I don't like is that they were quick to get Ben out.
> When  someone works against the staff, out with the whole thing. And when the  userbase is targeted, nobody will even bother to move a finger.
> (That's all speaking about FAF being lenient on bad decisions, of course)


 To be completely fair, Ben was a pattern of behavior over a few months. He also was removed for being horrible at communication and pissing off other mods, not just because he was abusing the infraction system to his will. This is a singular incident, even if it was a stupid one.

You all are making way too big of a deal of this. Sure, it was a bad decision and he shouldn't have done it. It was wrong and mean spirited. I think the complete and utter public humiliation and lack of respect for the guy is punishment enough for one wrongdoing. Plus, the site has learned a valuable lesson: if you're going to cover shit up, then at least do a good job of it.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> One incident is not a pattern and is no reason to de-admin someone.


 This isn't the first time he's done something like this you do realize?
And no I wasn't saying de-admin him, I was saying revoke his ability to ban and infract *for a set period of time*.
There should be some sort of repercussion for what happened.


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> This isn't the first time he's done something like this you do realize?
> And no I wasn't saying de-admin him, I was saying revoke his ability to ban and infract *for a set period of time*.
> There should be some sort of repercussion for what happened.


 No, I didn't realize. 

Can I have examples of previous instances with evidence?


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> No, I didn't realize.
> 
> Can I have examples of previous instances with evidence?


 He's made a habit of putting apps on the forums without testing them first, just like the "this" count which took less than a hour to hit the fan.


----------



## LizardKing (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> He's made a habit of putting apps on the forums without testing them first, just like the "this" count which took less than a hour to hit the fan.


 
Are you honestly comparing that to the miserable user plug-in?

Seriously?

What is _wrong_ with you?


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> He's made a habit of putting apps on the forums without testing them first, just like the "this" count which took less than a hour to hit the fan.


 That literally could not have LESS to do with this situation.


----------



## Diocletian (Feb 1, 2011)

Grendel said:


> Did anyone read Carenath's Twitter page?
> The one where he said "For those saying I should resign, FUCK YOU" ? Ah,  but then he deleted it and used a wonderful backpedal.


 
For the record, here is the post:

http://i55.tinypic.com/2hs6jhv.jpg

I don't think that; this whole event, is something that can be excused  with "I was tired and stressed"/"It was a mistake", and then going into  hiding for a while and then eventually returning like nothing happened. Even dropping admin status for a few days is only a token gesture of theatrical public contrition.

This  touches one more than just one member of staff or one incident since in the aftermath  of December, Dragoneer promised a staff code of conduct (which would  help deal with incidents like this), and yet I asked Dragoneer today if  there was any staff code of conduct and he did not answer.

That leads me to believe that the staff code of conduct, promised in  December, has not materialized. This raises of the question of whether  or not anything has changed under the hood. With no code of conduct: there is nothing mitigating against this sort of thing happening again.

Another issue arising from lack of a code of conduct is the trouble tickets: some of the admins simply do not answer them. A code of conduct might help with that, since I've noted that an increasing number of admins will refuse to do anything but that it be via trouble tickets. That's reasonable since it is neater than sending notes, and makes a "paper trail" so to speak. However, when trouble tickets can moulder so long unanswered (I have one that has been unanswered for 24 days) it puts you in a catch-22 where they're not being answered but you can't ask an admin to answer it because they'll ignore/delete your note.

It's not fair that just a few members of staff appear to answer the majority of the trouble tickets.

Also, I absolutely do not understand why proxies and paranoia over supposed group accounts have become such a burning issues, given how many other genuinely important issues there are. The only reason I can think of for focusing on it now is to shut up accountability.


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

Dio, your link doesn't work :C


----------



## Xenke (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Explain how come accountability got so many infractions then?



I hardly saw any of his posts, but I'm guessing it had something to do with callouts.



> No what I'm getting at is that questioning how the site is run is more likely to get you infracted.



Because, believe it or not, there's a right way and a wrong way to go about it. Most people (at least those who choose to do things publicly) decide to do it the wrong way.



> Regardless the rule was made to retroactively ban someone.



The point is fucking moot.



> Ratte overturned the ban, carenth banned him without discussion.



Hence why your other point is moot, and how does this go against the obvious checks and balances I've been alluding to?



> I know having the admins/mods follow the rules isn't very restricting, but using your argument they mine as well just toss the rules out the window.
> And yet it hasn't been address by ANY of the staff.
> 
> How any site should be run:
> The law of the land -> The rules -> Site owner -> Senior admin -> Admins -> Supermod -> Mod -> Users



The only problem is that "the rules" is subject to change at any time at the discretion of the site owner. It is not a stable policy.

Second, the policy itself is somewhat up to interpretation of the mods and admins. They can make their own judgement calls on submissions and post. Why to they have this 'arbitrary' power? Because that way they don't have to run everything by Dragoneer first. Do you realize how inefficient that would be?

Lastly, the system has it's checks and balances. If one mod/admin makes a bad judgement call that is unfavored among the other admins/mods, it gets overturned. If the issue is too evenly divided, 'Neer gets his way. Simple.


----------



## Zaraphayx (Feb 1, 2011)

Carenath is a now a senior member instead of forum admin, btw.

The mob got what it wanted, at least for the time being, you can stop spinning your wheels CF. (I'm a dreamer, I know)


----------



## Fay V (Feb 1, 2011)

Zaraphayx said:


> Carenath is a now a senior member instead of forum admin, btw.
> 
> The mob got what it wanted, at least for the time being, you can stop spinning your wheels CF. (I'm a dreamer, I know)



CF is being true to his fursona. He smells blood in the water and goes into a frenzy.


----------



## Aden (Feb 1, 2011)

Zaraphayx said:


> Carenath is a now a senior member instead of forum admin, btw.



Whoo, sure took you guys long enough to notice |3


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

Aden said:


> Whoo, sure took you guys long enough to notice |3


 
Seriously I didn't even have to be told, and I noticed sooner than anyone here.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Zaraphayx said:


> Carenath is a now a senior member instead of forum admin, btw.
> 
> The mob got what it wanted, at least for the time being, you can stop spinning your wheels CF. (I'm a dreamer, I know)


 *is bored now*
*stops spinning wheels*


----------



## LizardKing (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> Seriously I didn't even have to be told, and I noticed sooner than anyone here.


 
Well, me and Aden, right? We were _there_, man. We were _there_.


(Why are there fucking scrollbars if the post ends in a smiley)


----------



## Aden (Feb 1, 2011)

Let's print up some t-shirts so people on the street will know how cool we are


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

Watching CannonFodder and Xenke argue is like watching an antelope and a gazelle fight over a T-bone steak.


----------



## PatronymCapacities (Feb 1, 2011)

I don't mean to be refractory here.  I'm just trying to understand the purpose Caraneth's demotion.

Correct me if I'm wrong on any of these things.  Caraneth was a super admin who installed a plugin without consultation or communication to quell people he didn't like while not actually banning them.  Caraneth got found out.  Caraneth got demoted from super admin from the forums for installing said plug-in.  However, Caraneth hosts the forums themselves.  Caraneth at any given point could just as well ban or remove a person with little effort and with absolutely no consultation.  This effort would certainly be no more difficult than installing a gag-order plug-in on a message board.  Caraneth has shown the capacity to do that.  However, Caraneth's best effort to convince people that he wouldn't dream of doing any of these things was to put forth "FUCK YOU" in all caps on his twitter account to the people who weren't especially happy with his performance.  

As far as I can tell, nothing has changed except for the fact I've been further patronized and a person who already has proven a certain lack of restraint is now angrier.  Why was Caraneth demoted except to try and fool people into a bullshit sense of security?  What has effectively changed?  Does Caraneth even recognize that he fucked up?


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

PatronymCapacities said:


> I don't mean to be refractory here.


Have you considered Viagra?



> I'm just trying to understand the purpose Caraneth's demotion.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong on any of these things.  Caraneth was a super admin who installed a plugin without consultation or communication to quell people he didn't like while not actually banning them.  Caraneth got found out.  Caraneth got demoted from super admin from the forums for installing said plug-in.  However, Caraneth hosts the forums themselves.  Caraneth at any given point could just as well ban or remove a person with little effort and with absolutely no consultation.  This effort would certainly be no more difficult than installing a gag-order plug-in on a message board.  Caraneth has shown the capacity to do that.  However, Caraneth's best effort to convince people that he wouldn't dream of doing any of these things was to put forth "FUCK YOU" in all caps on his twitter account to the people who weren't especially happy with his performance.
> 
> As far as I can tell, nothing has changed except for the fact I've been further patronized and a person who already has proven a certain lack of restraint is now angrier.  Why was Caraneth demoted except to try and fool people into a bullshit sense of security?  What has effectively changed?  Does Caraneth even recognize that he fucked up?


To answer your questions in order: Pure PR. Sweet fuck-all. Doubt it.


----------



## LizardKing (Feb 1, 2011)

PatronymCapacities said:


> ...without consultation or communication to quell people he didn't like...



This part was never clarified.


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

LizardKing said:


> This part was never clarified.


 Agreed. Requesting clarification.


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

PatronymCapacities said:


> I don't mean to be refractory here.  I'm just trying to understand the purpose Caraneth's demotion.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong on any of these things.  Caraneth was a super admin who installed a plugin without consultation or communication to quell people he didn't like while not actually banning them.  Caraneth got found out.  Caraneth got demoted from super admin from the forums for installing said plug-in.  However, Caraneth hosts the forums themselves.  Caraneth at any given point could just as well ban or remove a person with little effort and with absolutely no consultation.  This effort would certainly be no more difficult than installing a gag-order plug-in on a message board.  Caraneth has shown the capacity to do that.  However, Caraneth's best effort to convince people that he wouldn't dream of doing any of these things was to put forth "FUCK YOU" in all caps on his twitter account to the people who weren't especially happy with his performance.
> 
> As far as I can tell, nothing has changed except for the fact I've been further patronized and a person who already has proven a certain lack of restraint is now angrier.  Why was Caraneth demoted except to try and fool people into a bullshit sense of security?  What has effectively changed?  Does Caraneth even recognize that he fucked up?


 
So...many..assumptions...in ..this...post.

I'm sorry but I'm going to do the asshole-mod thing where I give you an inconclusive answer, mostly because it's not my place to to answer all these questions. It's Carenath's. If he feels like telling the forum then he will. In the mean time please don't jump to conclusions.

Yes, I know how douchey that sounded, but I honestly have a moral obligation to be this vague. :/


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

LizardKing said:


> This part was never clarified.


 And I doubt it ever will.


Love! said:


> Watching CannonFodder and Xenke argue is like  watching an antelope and a gazelle fight over a T-bone steak.


 I would pay money to see that.


PatronymCapacities said:


> What has effectively changed?  Does Caraneth even recognize that he fucked up?


 Nothing really, he owns the server.


----------



## Bobskunk (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> So...many..assumptions...in ..this...post.
> 
> I'm sorry but I'm going to do the asshole-mod thing where I give you an inconclusive answer, mostly because *it's not my place to to answer all these questions. It's Carenath's. If he feels like telling the forum then he will.* In the mean time please don't jump to conclusions.
> 
> Yes, I know how douchey that sounded, but I honestly have a *moral obligation to be this vague*. :/


 
And if he doesn't?  Then what?  Took him hours to admit to doing it in the first place, and even then it was a "I did nothing wrong I'm not sorry if you were offended" type deal.  And then of course the "FUCK YOU" on twitter.

And hah at the second bolded part.  Looks like FA will never ever improve, since this is the attitude they cultivate.  Sounds like bad news for Ratte's future here.


----------



## PatronymCapacities (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> So...many..assumptions...in ..this...post.
> 
> I'm sorry but I'm going to do the asshole-mod thing where I give you an inconclusive answer, mostly because it's not my place to to answer all these questions. It's Carenath's. If he feels like telling the forum then he will. In the mean time please don't jump to conclusions.
> 
> Yes, I know how douchey that sounded, but I honestly have a moral obligation to be this vague. :/


 I'm not trying to purport any of this as truth.  This is how the situation looked to play out to me.  Like I said, I'd very much like to know where I'm wrong.  

You're not being assholish, you're doing your job as you see fit.  However, you need to recognize that if everyone as a rule is going to be silent on the matter out of a supposed moral obligation to website etiquette, people are going to fill in the blanks of your story with whatever makes most sense to them.  With the way this situation has been handled, you shouldn't be surprised that what people assume is less flattering than the truth.


----------



## Folflet (Feb 1, 2011)

Because I am not going to read through 4 pages to figure out whats going on: I use proxies a lot, will I be affected?


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

Bobskunk said:


> And if he doesn't?  Then what?  Took him hours to admit to doing it in the first place, and even then it was a "I did nothing wrong I'm not sorry if you were offended" type deal.  And then of course the "FUCK YOU" on twitter.
> 
> And hah at the second bolded part.  Looks like FA will never ever improve, since this is the attitude they cultivate.  Sounds like bad news for Ratte's future here.


 
It's true. In this instance I would be violating someone's privacy . It would be kind of like telling the entire forum that someone received an infraction whenever one was given.

And for the record I was going to leave the assumption jumping post alone but I didn't want to give you _no_ information. You guys deserve an explanation but I can't be the one to give it to you. :/



PatronymCapacities said:


> I'm not trying to purport any of this as truth.  This is how the situation looked to play out to me.  Like I said, I'd very much like to know where I'm wrong.
> 
> You're not being assholish, you're doing your job as you see fit.  However, you need to recognize that if everyone as a rule is going to be silent on the matter out of a supposed moral obligation to website etiquette, people are going to fill in the blanks of your story with whatever makes most sense to them.  With the way this situation has been handled, you shouldn't be surprised that what people assume is less flattering than the truth.


 This is fair. I guess I'm just trying to tell you guys not to freak out to much.

Bit late for that huh?


----------



## Bobskunk (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> It's true. In this instance I would be violating someone's privacy . It would be kind of like telling the entire forum that someone received an infraction whenever one was given.
> 
> And for the record I was going to leave the assumption jumping post alone but I didn't want to give you _no_ information. You guys deserve an explanation but I can't be the one to give it to you. :/


 
And that's the trouble here.  Often times we do deserve an explanation or even just to find out what's going on without resorting to friend of a friend, leaks and closed LJ drama communities.

Nobody ever speaks up.  The entire staff is uncoordinated and at any given moment some are stonewalling while the others are worried about stepping on toes.  What if one staff member does something wrong, let's give a generic example of using administrative access to the site to stalk an ex, but doesn't want to say they did it?  Is the right thing for the rest of the staff to say, "Oh, well, they don't want to come forward, so if we did, it would be an invasion of their privacy?"  Seems like there's little recourse when a staff member acts in bad faith and doesn't want to own up to it.  Also making him a senior member is moot: he still has direct, local access to the server.  That's a big reason why this is just a matter of PR and keeping it quiet than actually fixing a problem, his "not resigning, FUCK YOU" attitude only underlining that fact.

EDIT: also by that standard I violated the privacy of Rossyfox and Accountability by revealing that they were under a de facto ban that was meant to keep others from knowing they were effectively banned.  Or the current bans that show up as obvious red text with strikethrough.  The one big problem this "bans and infractions are never ever to be discussed publicly" causes is that there have been a few times where bans were handed out that came out of nowhere and seemed to have no reason.  This leads to an impression, justified or not, of arbitrary enforcement of existing, fluidly interpretable rules (see also: use of proxies is not currently against the rules) with a wide latitude of punishment.  On that note, Summercat freely discussed the current reasons for Accountability's bans in that thread, too.  Double standards.


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

inb4 "Carenath wasn't demoted; he stepped down voluntarily for a while."?


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

To Bobskunk:

I agree completely but I'm not going to budge on this. I'll just say is that you're making another huge assumption.


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> inb4 "Carenath wasn't demoted; he stepped down voluntarily for a while."?


 inb4 infraction



CannonFodder said:


> I would pay money to see that.


 Go back and read all the posts you and he just made.
You both make yourselves look like idiots, and it's not like what you're arguing about is even worth fighting over.


----------



## Bobskunk (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> To Bobskunk:
> 
> I agree completely but I'm not going to budge on this. I'll just say is that you're making another huge assumption.


 
Assumptions are all this website will get if it continues as it goes.  There is absolutely no substance or communication present on this website, to the point where even the staff themselves don't know what the hell's going on with itself.

This place is so goddamn stupid.  While you're not setting these moronic policies of silence, then complaining about guesses and misinterpretation, well..  I'll just say you're an okay dude in a completely bogus organization.  At least Ratte does what she thinks is right.  Otherwise I can't comprehend staying in here and going along with everything that makes up the culture here.  Either you support this status quo and like the way things are (and I don't believe this is the case based on these past few posts,) or you think it'll change eventually into something good; don't kid yourself.  That change will only come from people like Ratte, if at all.


----------



## PatronymCapacities (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> This is fair. I guess I'm just trying to tell you guys not to freak out to much.


It doesn't work like that.  A good amount of people don't trust the people in power here.  They find them secretive and deceptive.  There are far too many instances of admins saying "don't worry it's fine" and never admitting, let alone, addressing a problem.  Simply being told not to freak out doesn't stop us from doing it.  If anything, it has the opposite effect at this point.

I've been given no reason to think that Caraneth being demoted has fixed anything.  I've no reason to think that my best interest is being regarded by the administration.  No one but Ratte has taken the side of the general userbase.  Mods and admins aren't explaining a thing.  They're just doing what they can to cover thmselves and to keep the people in power aloof and intact.  It's concerning and degrading.  It doesn't take much to explain this situation or apologize for it.  I would love to know what's actually happening.  But until that happens, I'm going to assume the worst.  And I'm not going to be the only one.


----------



## Zaraphayx (Feb 1, 2011)

Aden said:


> Whoo, sure took you guys long enough to notice |3


 
To be fair this was like my 2nd post since I fell asleep last night or something.

So I am totally going with "I am the first one not in secret mod forums to know" on my t-shirt, thanks :V

Also Carenath even said on his twitter he was 'taking a break' so take that for whatever it's worth.


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

God you're a moron, Francis.

Still, reading the first few comments here has given me a mighty good chuckle, let me tell you. And it ain't in any way regarding the main issue at hand. 
x3


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> God you're a moron, Francis.
> 
> Still, reading the first few comments here has given me a mighty good chuckle, let me tell you. And it ain't in any way regarding the main issue at hand.
> x3


yay?


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> God you're a moron, Francis.


 WOAH THERE XAERUN. 

THAT'S INSULTING A USER. 

CANNONFODDER MAY REPORT YOU FOR THAT AND GET YOU INFRACTED


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> WOAH THERE XAERUN.
> 
> THAT'S INSULTING A USER.
> 
> CANNONFODDER MAY REPORT YOU FOR THAT AND GET YOU INFRACTED


 
JASHWA I HATE U AND AM GONNA EAT YO FAMILY


----------



## Lobar (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> It's true. In this instance I would be violating someone's privacy . It would be kind of like telling the entire forum that someone received an infraction whenever one was given.


 
This would actually be a good change.  Transparency is what FA needs most right now.


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> JASHWA I HATE U AND AM GONNA EAT YO FAMILY


 My children? ;3


----------



## Aden (Feb 1, 2011)

Yeesh, serves me right for not logging into the forums every five minutes.

I'm now going to toe the gray line of what's acceptable. Maybe it's rude as fuck, maybe Carenath was waiting for someone else to speak on his behalf anyway. I'll accept the consequences.

Yes, Carenath made the decision to step down. He carried out his own demotion. Even though the forum servers are in his possession, the general state of the forums will remain unchanged and he will continue to look after the servers. Regardless of what anyone may think, he does regret what he did and I believe he learned a lesson (and don't be so quick to call bullshit on that). Stress was probably a factor - although I know that's no excuse. I don't know if he himself will make an announcement tomorrow, the next day, or never.

So that's the state of things. Personal opinion time: in a year or so, he might want to come back and moderate and I will personally be okay with it. He's been in IRC channels with me over _n_ years and he always struck me as a good guy throughout our conversations. Pulling the 'isolated incident' card always seemed scummy to me but I'm going to do it in this instance.


----------



## Monster. (Feb 1, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> My children? ;3


 
HIDE YO WIFE, HIDE YO KIDS



Aden said:


> I'm now going to toe the gray line of what's  acceptable. Maybe it's rude as fuck, maybe Carenath was waiting for  someone else to speak on his behalf anyway. I'll accept the  consequences.


I applaud you. Seriously.


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

Aden said:


> Yeesh, serves me right for not logging into the forums every five minutes.
> 
> I'm now going to toe the gray line of what's acceptable. Maybe it's rude as fuck, maybe Carenath was waiting for someone else to speak on his behalf anyway. I'll accept the consequences.
> 
> ...



*(sotto voce)* Psst. Aden. Xaerun was just about to announce this. Check Irc.


----------



## Jashwa (Feb 1, 2011)

ITT: Aden wants brownie points from the users so he lets us into the scheme of things. ;p


----------



## Xenke (Feb 1, 2011)

Aden said:


> Yeesh, serves me right for not logging into the forums every five minutes.
> 
> I'm now going to toe the gray line of what's acceptable. Maybe it's rude as fuck, maybe Carenath was waiting for someone else to speak on his behalf anyway. I'll accept the consequences.
> 
> ...


 
For some reason I read this and think "Summer".

Change yo name pink.


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

Apologies for chopping and changing here, I've replied to the bits that stuck out.




PatronymCapacities said:


> However, Caraneth hosts the forums themselves.  Caraneth at any given point could just as well ban or remove a person with little effort and with absolutely no consultation.


So let's blow up his house.
Seriously bro, if he stays at the Senior Member level and keeps his head down, that's that. Deal w/it.  He's stepped down OF HIS OWN ACCORD
(([10:03] <@Carenath> Yes, I stepped down for a while. I need a break.), not that you'll care) and he came forward of his own accord, so... chill out.


PatronymCapacities said:


> This effort would certainly be no more difficult than installing a gag-order plug-in on a message board.  Caraneth has shown the capacity to do that.


As would just y'know, not stepping down.
The forums will continue to be ran as per usual, and I and the rest of the staff have complete faith in that. He slipped up, but as Aden said, this has been an isolated incident, etc. (just go read his post, damn it.)


PatronymCapacities said:


> However, Caraneth's best effort to convince people that he wouldn't dream of doing any of these things was to put forth "FUCK YOU" in all caps on his twitter account to the people who weren't especially happy with his performance.


I would be rather displeased with a lynching mob as well. But hey, it said he wouldn't quit- he still *stepped down* to appease y'all, in a way.


PatronymCapacities said:


> As far as I can tell, nothing has changed except for the fact I've been further patronized and a person who already has proven a certain lack of restraint is now angrier.  Why was Caraneth demoted except to try and fool people into a bullshit sense of security?  What has effectively changed?  Does Caraneth even recognize that he fucked up?


Do I still need to respond to this?



Diocletian said:


> This  touches one more than just one member of staff or one incident since in the aftermath  of December, Dragoneer promised a staff code of conduct (which would  help deal with incidents like this), and yet I asked Dragoneer today if  there was any staff code of conduct and he did not answer


It is definitely well under development, at the moment there are strict staff guidelines for security.





Bobskunk said:


> EDIT: also by that standard I violated the privacy of Rossyfox and Accountability by revealing that they were under a de facto ban that was meant to keep others from knowing they were effectively banned.  Or the current bans that show up as obvious red text with strikethrough.  The one big problem this "bans and infractions are never ever to be discussed publicly" causes is that there have been a few times where bans were handed out that came out of nowhere and seemed to have no reason.  This leads to an impression, justified or not, of arbitrary enforcement of existing, fluidly interpretable rules (see also: use of proxies is not currently against the rules) with a wide latitude of punishment.  On that note, Summercat freely discussed the current reasons for Accountability's bans in that thread, too.  Double standards.


The reason for that rule is primarily so that R&R doesn't get stunk up with "I GOT THIS INFRACTION, WHITEKNIGHTS ASSEEEEMBBLLEEEEE!". You know it'd happen.


----------



## Aden (Feb 1, 2011)

Augh, I just checked the forums for five minutes before going to dinner and didn't have time to sign on to the IRC

Sorry for stealing your thunder xaerun :c


----------



## Lobar (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> The reason for that rule is primarily so that R&R doesn't get stunk up with "I GOT THIS INFRACTION, WHITEKNIGHTS ASSEEEEMBBLLEEEEE!". You know it'd happen.


 
For Cerbrus/Ben/Renton Whitetail BS infractions, maybe.  Which is part of the point - with transparency comes accountability.


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

Lobar said:


> For Cerbrus/Ben/Renton Whitetail BS infractions, maybe.  Which is part of the point - with transparency comes accountability.


 If users report the infraction PM with details of their appeal, all the staff can see it anyway.


----------



## Ben (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> If users report the infraction PM with details of their appeal, all the staff can see it anyway.


 
Here's the funny thing though, I did this recently with an infraction I got, and the mod who issued the infraction complained and said that was wrong of me to do. Clearly, not everyone is on the same page here (although I agree that reporting the infraction PM as a means of appeal is better than going to an admin that would favor me).


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

Lobar said:


> For Cerbrus/Ben/Renton Whitetail BS infractions, maybe.  Which is part of the point - with transparency comes accountability.


that reminds me of something s and r told me once
is telling someone he was adopted really an infractable offense here?


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> Here's the funny thing though, I did this recently with an infraction I got, and the mod who issued the infraction complained and said that was wrong of me to do. Clearly, not everyone is on the same page here (although I agree that reporting the infraction PM as a means of appeal is better than going to an admin that would favor me).


Interesting. I'll chase that up.



Love! said:


> that reminds me of something s and r told me once
> is telling someone he was adopted really an infractable offense here?


Can well be, yeah.


----------



## Heimdal (Feb 1, 2011)

I would have figured that the user base was central to FaF. The rules ought to exist, and be enforced, with the best interests of the user base at heart.

I haven't really seen that lately. It has appeared more that some admins police FaF with their own personal vision of what they want FaF to be. It may be very noble, but we don't know/aren't allowed to see that. All we can see is what appears to be utter chaos. I thought this place had something to do with us?

I honestly don't care about who gets what punishment. I just want to see the user base treated like a critical part of these forums. Not a bunch of disposable peasants.


----------



## Bobskunk (Feb 1, 2011)

Actually I do have a question, it seems like admins get exasperated that people don't know to send appeal emails to admin@furaffinity.net.

Why isn't this address and instruction in an easier to find place?  I mean, on the forums all you get is a "you are banned until date" and on the mainsite you get a countdown and sometimes a reason: I don't remember the mainsite having an email link on the ban page to send an appeal.  If an effort isn't made to make that crucial piece of information public, then having to answer/(further threaten) people registering again to ask what happened and how to reverse it will happen less.  Especially since that's the only place I ever remember seeing admin@furaffinity.net mentioned as a means of appealing a ban: it's not like it's possible to communicate with any staff on site during a ban, and the culture of this place is so afraid of stepping on each others' toes that IMing/messaging individual admins will get "not my problem" or "i can't do anything about a ban made by someone else"


----------



## Monster. (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> Can well be, yeah.


What's the reasoning behind that?


----------



## Bobskunk (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> If users report the infraction PM with details of their appeal, all the staff can see it anyway.


 
can't report an infraction PM if you're banned


----------



## PatronymCapacities (Feb 1, 2011)

Well this is a nice surprise.  I'd like to think you guys told us these things because it was the right thing to do, not because it became too annoying for you to stay silent.

Regardless, thanks.


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

Bobskunk said:


> Actually I do have a question, it seems like admins get exasperated that people don't know to send appeal emails to admin@furaffinity.net.
> 
> Why isn't this address and instruction in an easier to find place?  I mean, on the forums all you get is a "you are banned until date" and on the mainsite you get a countdown and sometimes a reason: I don't remember the mainsite having an email link on the ban page to send an appeal.  If an effort isn't made to make that crucial piece of information public, then having to answer/(further threaten) people registering again to ask what happened and how to reverse it will happen less.  Especially since that's the only place I ever remember seeing admin@furaffinity.net mentioned as a means of appealing a ban: it's not like it's possible to communicate with any staff on site during a ban, and the culture of this place is so afraid of stepping on each others' toes that IMing/messaging individual admins will get "not my problem" or "i can't do anything about a ban made by someone else"


Again, I'll chase this up.



Gaz said:


> What's the reasoning behind that?


Because
a) It can be harassing
b) It can be general douchebaggery
c) It can be spam/useless posting



Bobskunk said:


> can't report an infraction PM if you're banned


EMAIL ADMIN@FURAFFINITY.NET FFFFFFFFFFF

Or, contact staff mainsite
Contact staff in IRC
IM
Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, LiveJournal
Go up and talk to them in person
Fun fact though: Most people that do appeal infractions don't immediately get banned for them, most of the users that get banned are damned aware they did something wrong and deserved it.
[...]




PatronymCapacities said:


> Well this is a nice surprise.  I'd like to think you guys told us these things because it was the right thing to do, not because it became too annoying for you to stay silent.


 That's right, bro.


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> Can well be, yeah.


under what conditions?
it seems kind of silly to infract someone over that if the person being told that wasn't adopted and knew he wasn't adopted


----------



## Monster. (Feb 1, 2011)

Love! said:


> under what conditions?
> it seems kind of silly to  infract someone over that if the person being told that wasn't adopted  and knew he wasn't adopted





Xaerun said:


> Because
> a) It can be harassing
> b) It can be general douchebaggery
> c) It can be spam/useless posting


I see. Fair enough, I suppose.


----------



## Lobar (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> If users report the infraction PM with details of their appeal, all the staff can see it anyway.


 
This is the first time I've ever heard to handle things this way.  The most I've heard otherwise is, "Reply back to me in PM only to discuss it, and I'll decide if I've been unfair or not.  Speak of it anywhere else and you're banned."


I still feel full transparency is best.


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

Love! said:


> under what conditions?
> it seems kind of silly to infract someone over that if the person being told that wasn't adopted and knew he wasn't adopted


 
If you call me a dickhead, I am well aware that I do not have a phallus projecting from any place on my head or face. It's the same thing, really.



Lobar said:


> This is the first time I've ever heard to handle things this way.  The most I've heard otherwise is, "Reply back to me in PM only to discuss it, and I'll decide if I've been unfair or not.  Speak of it anywhere else and you're banned."
> I still feel full transparency is best.


I'm going to talk to people about that, I feel that reporting the PM would be better because it lessens the chance of bias, and it documents the appeal properly. We'll see about full transparency but... start small, yo.


----------



## Ratte (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> If you call me a dickhead, I am well aware that I do not have a phallus projecting from any place on my head or face. It's the same thing, really.


 
It's just in your throat.


----------



## Love! (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> If you call me a dickhead, I am well aware that I do not have a phallus projecting from any place on my head or face. It's the same thing, really.


no, it really isn't
'dickhead', like 'douchebag', is insulting because it's a metaphor that unfavorably compares a person to something with a humorously unpleasant connotation
saying 'you were adopted' is, if anything, on par with 'yo' momma' jokes



Ratte said:


> It's just in your throat.


 also this


----------



## Bobskunk (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> EMAIL ADMIN@FURAFFINITY.NET FFFFFFFFFFF
> 
> Or, contact staff mainsite
> Contact staff in IRC
> ...


 
you dummy I specifically said that the only time "appeal at admins@furaffinity" comes up is in forum posts about bans, NOT ON THE BAN PAGES THEMSELVES.  This is my problem!  List ways to appeal on those pages and maybe you (the collective of FA staff, not you specifically) will have to answer this question less!  Furthermore, your options for private contact are an admin who is: busy, _doesn't want to step on anyone's toes_, or the issuing admin who more often will not will think it's legitimate and that you should stop whining before it becomes permanent.  Ever seen someone come into the IRC?  I mean, I've been permanently banned from it by Pinkuh based on a convenient lie, so I don't know what it's been like these past years, but coming in and saying "I'd like to ask about a ban" always caused a negative/intimidating reaction from users and staff when I saw it.  Plus Rossyfox was in for a week asking if something was wrong with the forums and if anyone else was having the same problem, and he was ignored, so...

I'm also not talking about infractions, I'm talking about bans.  Once you're banned, that's it- all access is revoked, including to your PMs/infraction list, which would be useful for someone attempting to appeal a ban to have access to- on the forums, you can't even see the reason, you're just banned.  Do you see how this can be confusing?  And with the infraction removed, please, tell me if that also removes a three strikes temp ban from the record.

EDIT:


Lobar said:


> This is the first time I've ever heard to handle things this way.  The most I've heard otherwise is, "Reply back to me in PM only to discuss it, and I'll decide if I've been unfair or not.  Speak of it anywhere else and you're banned."
> 
> 
> I still feel full transparency is best.


 
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

Bobskunk said:


> you dummy I specifically said that the only time "appeal at admins@furaffinity" comes up is in forum posts about bans, NOT ON THE BAN PAGES THEMSELVES.  This is my problem!  List ways to appeal on those pages and maybe you (the collective of FA staff, not you specifically) will have to answer this question less!  Furthermore, your options for private contact are an admin who is: busy, _doesn't want to step on anyone's toes_, or the issuing admin who more often will not will think it's legitimate and that you should stop whining before it becomes permanent.  Ever seen someone come into the IRC?  I mean, I've been permanently banned from it by Pinkuh based on a convenient lie, so I don't know what it's been like these past years, but coming in and saying "I'd like to ask about a ban" always caused a negative/intimidating reaction from users and staff when I saw it.  Plus Rossyfox was in for a week asking if something was wrong with the forums and if anyone else was having the same problem, and he was ignored, so...
> 
> I'm also not talking about infractions, I'm talking about bans.  Once you're banned, that's it- all access is revoked, including to your PMs/infraction list, which would be useful for someone attempting to appeal a ban to have access to- on the forums, you can't even see the reason, you're just banned.  Do you see how this can be confusing?  And with the infraction removed, please, tell me if that also removes a three strikes temp ban from the record.


 
I have taken your and Lobar's suggestions into account and have submitted them to the rest of the staff, don't worry.
In regards to yours, making the "email admin" option appear on the ban page by default. And yes, if the third strike is reversed, of course the temp ban goes off the record.


----------



## Bobskunk (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> I have taken your and Lobar's suggestions into account and have submitted them to the rest of the staff, don't worry.
> In regards to yours, making the "email admin" option appear on the ban page by default. And yes, if the third strike is reversed, of course the temp ban goes off the record.


 
Not putting "here's how to appeal!!!" on ban pages should preclude complaints about people asking how to appeal- it's only common knowledge to you because you've had to say it so many times, but don't consider the source of the frequently asked question.
kinda like how a complete lack of communication should preclude complaints about huge/wild/whatever assumptions on the part of users in the face of a significant event and staff silence

p.s. I've been calling for this sort of thing for months, you are literally the first person to do anything.  Why is FA so paralyzed?


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

Bobskunk said:


> Not putting "here's how to appeal!!!" on ban pages should preclude complaints about people asking how to appeal- it's only common knowledge to you because you've had to say it so many times, but don't consider the source of the frequently asked question.
> kinda like how a complete lack of communication should preclude complaints about huge/wild/whatever assumptions on the part of users in the face of a significant event and staff silence


...I said I was sorry.

But duly noted. You deserve better from me.



Bobskunk said:


> p.s. I've been calling for this sort of thing for months, you are literally the first person to do anything.  Why is FA so paralyzed?


 Couldn't tell you.


----------



## Bobskunk (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> ...I said I was sorry.
> 
> But duly noted. You deserve better from me.
> 
> ...


 
Yeah, I know, and I forgive you.  You're not a bad dude.  In that case, I was speaking broadly- there have been so many public complaints and admonishments from nearly all the staff because users come up with huge paragraphs of possible explanations, because things happen and are never addressed by staff.  Whether it's because some don't want to, or some are afraid, or because they want to craft the perfect press release that paints FA in the best possible light and end up taking so long to do so that they just give up and say nothing because 90% of users forget, in the end the result is the same.  We don't even have any updates or information on what's going on with the site: just "something will happen in a few months," "we're paying for a new UI," and the popular "we're working on it, trust us."  Stuff like Carenath's little stunt do not do much to repair this trust, and it's pretty clear that users are seen as untrustworthy.

If FA stops considering any and all criticism as an attack, that would be a good start.  Shitting on bad practices and policies != shitting on FA, unless those bad practices and policies are to be considered part of FA's essence.  If that's the case, then we're in trouble.


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Bobskunk said:


> p.s. I've been calling for this sort of thing for months, you are literally the first person to do anything.  Why is FA so paralyzed?


 Do you really need to ask?
The entire site is fundamentally flawed, it's a free website run through donations.  None of the staff is paid, the admin/mod powers are poorly defined, and every time something goes down they pretty much have to cover up for each other, lest the lynch mob gets a hold of the staff member who screwed up.  There are so many utter flaws in how the site that they are going to have to hire a programmer to fix the main site, and the only way I could see how they could keep admins/mods from fucking up would be to define their powers and when they should intervene in clear cut wording.  So that when someone does do something stupid the rest of the staff doesn't have to cover for them, as it stands right now covering for your co-staff is more of a requirement than most other things.


Bobskunk said:


> If FA stops considering any and all criticism as  an attack, that would be a good start.


I totally agree with this.


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 1, 2011)

I am okay with getting paid if you guys want to pay me
Just putting that out there


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Xaerun said:


> I am okay with getting paid if you guys want to pay me
> Just putting that out there


 I understand it's a free site, what I'm getting as is there's so many problems that arise because of the fact fa has over 200k users and that it's free.
Also it shouldn't be required of you to cover for your fellow staff if they do something that ends up backfiring.


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> the admin/mod powers are poorly defined,


 
I can fix this. Would you like me to make a thread explaining exactly what we can and can't do?


----------



## CannonFodder (Feb 1, 2011)

Browder said:


> I can fix this. Would you like me to make a thread explaining exactly what we can and can't do?


 I have a feeling that it is very broad.


----------



## Browder (Feb 1, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I have a feeling that it is very very broad.


 Ish. Broad-ish. I'll make a thread.

Also I think this has largely run its course. I'm closing it.


----------



## Ratte (Feb 1, 2011)

You know, to be honest I'm getting kind of tired of the "it's a free site" excuse to let big holes in said site to run rampant and not get fixed until it really fucks people over.

I'm not trying to belittle the admins and the work they do, but with such a large userbase and the recent exploitations on FA/F, it might not be a bad idea to at least expand the pool of admins so things can get done when they need to.

\spout-off

EDIT: Wow, sorry for having a fucking opinion.


----------

