# Is there a Moderator Training Manual?



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

I feel like with each topic, we all get to know each other a little better, which is heartwarming.

In the previous episode of Quickly Lock RestrainedRaptor's Thread, Neer said in his closing remarks:



> The vast majority of our staff are volunteers, and their time and effort does not deserve this level of "respect."



On the contrary; I might question why they do it, but I certainly respect the time they put into it. However, that respect is on the condition that they follow a set of well-defined procedures, much like an engineer diagnosing a car. Hence I'm making this new thread to talk about the moderation process, and how moderators are trained. I would love to know...

Does FA have a set of documents outlining the moderation process and training guides for volunteers?
If not... Erm, why not? Do you plan to make some soon?
If yes, then can we please see them? Making the documents public would aid in our understanding of the process and also open it up to valuable feedback.
For all you other lovely other forum members, I invite you to discuss what you think _should_ be in such a training document. Do you have any examples from other websites or jobs relating to customer support? Please share!


----------



## quoting_mungo (Nov 17, 2022)

Yes, there's internal policies (which has been mentioned publicly on multiple occassions), and no, you can't see them. I'm not going to pretend to know every nuance as to why, and I'm not going to flirt with saying too much by making an educated guess.

I'm honestly surprised you weren't tempbanned considering your last (linked) thread is literally reposting removed content. Which should be an *obvious* big no-no. When I was on staff you 100% would have been. Hell, your first thread would have been closed immediately with, at most, "other people's suspensions are not your business." (Not in those exact words, but the general gist of it.)


----------



## vickers (Nov 17, 2022)

That doesn't seem like the type of thing that should be public, considering that it would be something for internal use within a company. But I'm no legal expert.


----------



## ben909 (Nov 17, 2022)

is there really a benefit to asking this?


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

vickers said:


> That doesn't seem like the type of thing that should be public, considering that it would be something for internal use within a company. But I'm no legal expert.


The difference between this and other internal company documents is that good moderation practices shouldn't be considered a trade secret. Weasyl took a different direction by publishing its Staff Code of Conduct. According to this extremely old thread, FA might have one of these too now, but without knowing what's in it, it's hard to say if it's of any use.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

ben909 said:


> is there really a benefit to asking this?


Yes, I believe there are. The main one that's on my mind is detecting contradictions between moderation guidelines and the publicly visible ToS, CoC and AUP.

For example, if the AUP says "Section 123: you're not allowed to post a picture of an apple" but the training manual says "If you see a picture of an orange, you should delete it and cite section 123". You can see that there's an issue here, which would cause users to be unfairly penalised, and any future appeals to fail.


----------



## luffy (Nov 17, 2022)

We have a huge document that is... _checks_... 84 pages long. No, we can not and will not post it publicly as it uses real use cases for examples, among other reasons (shared with real staff names/emails, internal discussion happening in comments, etc.). No, there are no contradictions like you've mentioned. The only thing that I would consider relatable to that is a list of specific characters and how to handle them in cub porn tickets.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

It's really nice to get a straight answer for once. I appreciate that. Thanks.

I understand that you may not be able to share all of the documentation for the reasons specified, but it would be very helpful for me if you could share some excerpts from it, paraphrased if necessary. The parts I'd find most helpful would relate to:

Amount of detail/evidence given when formulating a submission/journal deletion notice to send to the user.
Judging and handling violations of CoC section 3.1
Judging and handling violations of AUP section 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3


----------



## luffy (Nov 17, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> It's really nice to get a straight answer for once. I appreciate that. Thanks.
> 
> I understand that you may not be able to share all of the documentation for the reasons specified, but it would be very helpful for me if you could share some excerpts from it, paraphrased if necessary. The parts I'd find most helpful would relate to:
> 
> ...


This isn't something that I can disclose as an admin. If a director wants to, they may, but you would have better luck reaching them by direct question ticket on the main site.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

Mmm... That's a bit of a shame, since I have yet to observe a single successful trouble ticket so far, and it's impossible to determine whether one was answered by a director or just someone who hates me... On a completely unrelated note, how many directors are there other than Dragoneer? I thought FA used to have a staff page.


----------



## luffy (Nov 17, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> Mmm... That's a bit of a shame, since I have yet to observe a single successful trouble ticket so far, and it's impossible to determine whether one was answered by a director or just someone who hates me... On a completely unrelated note, how many directors are there other than Dragoneer? I thought FA used to have a staff page.


We did and, no disrespect, this is an example of why we don't anymore. Coupled with targeted harassment. I can assure you if you ask for a director, it won't be answered by a mod or admin. We don't really have time to be vindictive, and I verified all of your requested escalations were escalated to the proper channel.


----------



## Raever (Nov 17, 2022)

Well, there ya have it. Assuming Luffy hasn't done it already with any current things you might have open, asking for a director to clarify some things in your next ticket sounds like a great step forward. And also a good way to keep FA Forums out of the interpersonal drama. X'D


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

luffy said:


> We don't really have time to be vindictive, and I verified all of your requested escalations were escalated to the proper channel.


Yeah, I wish I could take more than your word for that. I have no time or interest in bitter squabbling either, but if you look at things from my point of view, I have simply been trying to point out a flaw in the AUP that's affected dozens of people, and every step of the way, I've been struck down by the anonymous "FurAffinity Staff".



Raever said:


> Well, there ya have it.


I really wish it was that simple. I'm not even allowed to make any more trouble tickets on the matter so it makes no difference. I have been found guilty of violating the CoC by the court of Frost Dragon Art LLC, and every single time (approximately 6 times) I've asked for evidence (at least three of which have been seen by the director), the answer has been "the content was removed appropriately", "we're not going to tell you why", "please go away and never ask us again", and "this thread is closed" respectively. It's clear that if I ask again in another TT, I'll be suspended for 1 day due to a second count of CoC 3.1. _That _is why I'm here on the forums. It is literally my only option.

As a very rough estimate, the tickets and forum threads have counted up to at least 2 man-hours of work now, when answering the question (or approving my appeal) would've taken maybe 10 minutes at most. Perhaps these kinds of figures should be factored into the training material.


----------



## Vino The Strange-One (Nov 17, 2022)

Before this thread closes, I will leave a message for fun. :]


----------



## Raever (Nov 17, 2022)

@luffy is there an active support email for @RestrainedRaptor to reach out to for further help beyond just reopening tickets...? That way if it's through email the member might be able to have more detailed respectful discussions without the fear of being in trouble for seeking out further answers regarding their confusion (and without bringing it into a public space, thus no longer putting the staff in an uncomfortable spot).


----------



## luffy (Nov 17, 2022)

Raever said:


> @luffy is there an active support email for @RestrainedRaptor to reach out to for further help beyond just reopening tickets...? That way if it's through email the member might be able to have more detailed respectful discussions without the fear of being in trouble for seeking out further answers regarding their confusion (and without bringing it into a public space, thus no longer putting the staff in an uncomfortable spot).


No, everything is kept in tickets for consistency.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Nov 17, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> It's clear that if I ask again in another TT, I'll be suspended for 1 day due to a second count of CoC 3.1. _That _is why I'm here on the forums. It is literally my only option.


And staff is being incredibly nice to you by not treating these threads as another violation. You've been told the journals were a violation. You've been told _how_ your journals were a violation. Reread the line in your removal notice starting with "-- You have done this by"; that's your answer.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

Raever said:


> ...


I truly admire your optimism and your desire to help. I wish you luck in becoming a director of your own company some day.



quoting_mungo said:


> Reread the line in your removal notice starting with "-- You have done this by"; that's your answer.


Yes, thank you for pointing that out. If you look at the trouble tickets, you'll see that's precisely what I was disputing. (Edit: to clarify, I put forward evidence that I _did not do _said things, or that said things are _not _in the CoC at all)



luffy said:


> No, everything is kept in tickets for consistency.


Perhaps grant me an official pass to create another ticket?


----------



## RamblingRenegade (Nov 17, 2022)

Most sites I have been on when it comes to being a moderator, the first rule in them picking a new mod is for the person to not ask to become one or how to become one


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

RamblingRenegade said:


> Most sites I have been on when it comes to being a moderator, the first rule in them picking a new mod is for the person to not ask to become one or how to become one


Yep, that's fair. I think along the same lines when considering mods for my Discord server and DA group. At least, they shouldn't be asking without having a proven track record elsewhere.


----------



## TyraWadman (Nov 17, 2022)

If I had to guess, it probably has everything to do with you posting journals that not only harass staff, but spread misinformation about a third party ruling. But that's just my educated guess.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 17, 2022)

TyraWadman said:


> But that's just my educated guess.


I'm very relieved that you clarified that. I certainly wouldn't want anyone to think you were accusing me of anything.

Everything I've done thus far, I did for my friends and other users who believe they were unfairly treated. You are, of course, entitled to criticize the methods. One day, you might feel the need to stand up for something you believe in, and perhaps then you'll understand.

By the way, I think you and mungo would make an excellent couple. Please invite me to the wedding once it's scheduled. 

Anyway, back to the topic at hand... We were talking about mod training guidelines, I believe.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 18, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> Amount of detail/evidence given when formulating a submission/journal deletion notice to send to the user.
> Judging and handling violations of CoC section 3.1
> Judging and handling violations of AUP section 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3


Oh, one other thing I thought of, if Dragoneer is willing to help discuss this: I noticed that in all trouble tickets filed by myself and other friends, mods and admins_ never ever_ commented on, or even acknowledged that the user had provided evidence on defence of their case. Is there a policy or guideline about that too?


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 26, 2022)

@Dragoneer your feedback on this is still very welcome. Or you can delegate to another director, if one exists.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Nov 27, 2022)

Nev*e*r had any issue with the moderation team on here myself, but I have seen some real crappy ones on other sites.* I also have no idea what you did or did not do, so my response is just a general, overall commentary on what I have seen through the years.*

Typically, mods receive little to no training. They simply get told to read the rules, how to use the systems, and "to ask for clarification" if they are "unsure" if anything. After that, they usually get free reign. The rules are usually written in a way to give them as much wiggle room in their interpretations as possible. 

In my experience, mods absolutely will use a rule against posting apples to infract you for posting an orange (and will pick and choose which oranges to crack down on). If you take it to an admin, 99.9 times out of 100, they will side with the mod without looking into it for more than 30 secs.

If you have gotten to the point where they have banned you from even opening tickets, just give it up. Again, I don't know what you did or did not do, but at this point, *even if* you were in the right, you can not win. They will just keep ruling against you until you get banned. Time to move on.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 27, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> you can not win


Pretty much. I know they wouldn't dare do a u-turn on their decision or do anything to upset their fellow mod buddies, but I was _kinda_ hoping for a small amount of justification, even if it isn't enough to challenge my defense case. I mostly made this thread to get some more insight into how widespread this systemic lack of justice might be.


----------



## luffy (Nov 27, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> Nev*e*r had any issue with the moderation team on here myself, but I have seen some real crappy ones on other sites.* I also have no idea what you did or did not do, so my response is just a general, overall commentary on what I have seen through the years.*
> 
> Typically, mods receive little to no training. They simply get told to read the rules, how to use the systems, and "to ask for clarification" if they are "unsure" if anything. After that, they usually get free reign. The rules are usually written in a way to give them as much wiggle room in their interpretations as possible.
> 
> ...


This is untrue for us.  We have training sessions, both group and individual.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 27, 2022)

Are they trained on appeals too? And are they trained on cases where the appeal _should_ be approved?


----------



## luffy (Nov 27, 2022)

No.  There's no reason for a moderator to handle appeals.  Our hierarchy is Moderator -> Admin -> Director.  Only Admins and Directors can handle appeals, and only in our relevant areas.  To get more specific, Admins can handle appeals through the ticket system (mostly for warnings, since suspensions go through email due to their nature), and Directors handle appeals through email.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 27, 2022)

Do all admins go through the same training?
What are the relevant areas, and how many admins are there in each?


----------



## luffy (Nov 27, 2022)

Each has one admin.  If you escalate a mod, you get the admin.  If you escalate the admin, you get a Director.

We (admins) go through checks and balances.  If we deny an appeal, or make the wrong judgement call on something and a user appeals it, it's handled by a Director, and they're fairly lenient as long as intent is good.  They always explain why they repealed something so that we can learn.  We don't have "appeals training" as our "appeals training" is basically just being experienced and knowing what flies and doesn't fly on the site.  It's an understanding of the guidelines to accurately enforce them (though we make mistakes sometimes - again, checks and balances).

There is Upload Policy, Content Authenticity Assurance, Minor Protective Services (which I am admin of), Code of Conduct, and the Forum team (which is just Flamingo and I).


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 27, 2022)

Ah okay... I think I'm starting to understand where things went wrong for me.

I knew it had to be someone who read my forum thread that censored my journals (narrowing it down to approximately three people). I underestimated the number of admins that might deal with such a case, and in requesting some people _not_ handle the case, it most likely got escalated straight to the person who deleted them in the first place. I never stood a chance. It's also kind-of ironic that said person accused me of badmouthing moderators when it turns out that they couldn't possibly have been part of this process.


----------



## luffy (Nov 27, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> Ah okay... I think I'm starting to understand where things went wrong for me.
> 
> I knew it had to be someone who read my forum thread that censored my journals (narrowing it down to approximately three people). I underestimated the number of admins that might deal with such a case, and in requesting some people _not_ handle the case, it most likely got escalated straight to the person who deleted them in the first place. I never stood a chance. It's also kind-of ironic that said person accused me of badmouthing moderators when it turns out that they couldn't possibly have been part of this process.


I can't get into specifics, but most of us (admin+) are privy to the situation at this point, heh.  Anyway, yeah - we have our own departments.  I'm trained in all of them, but this is kinda what I was talking about earlier when I said I didn't want to disrespect the person who was responding to you by reviewing the situation on my own (or whatever I said).  It's not my place, and I'm either a subordinate or peer.


----------



## reptile logic (Nov 27, 2022)

To the OP, I truly feel sorry for you. To feel so victimized that you can't let go of this must be horrific, in your own mind. To many of the rest of us, your plight feels comically tedious; bordering on ridiculous.

Some advice from an old fart who learned this tidbit of wisdom years ago: You can't always have things your own way, and the squeaky wheel doesn't always get greased. Sometimes folks just let it wear out 'till it falls off the wagon.

I will bother you no further with my presence, here.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 27, 2022)

luffy said:


> this is kinda what I was talking about earlier when I said I didn't want to disrespect the person


Roger that, loud and clear. Also, my condolences.



reptile logic said:


> To the OP, I truly feel sorry for you. To feel so victimized that you can't let go of this must be horrific, in your own mind. To many of the rest of us, your plight feels comically tedious; bordering on ridiculous.


Less horrific, but still frustrating. If you don't like it, then you're welcome to stop following my threads.

As a reminder, the reason why I'm doing this is because I wanted to highlight issues with FA's policies and the way they're executed, because dozens of people I know have been hurt by this. That means there are potentially hundreds of people who have been subject to injustice. It's not just about me. I just can't speak about the specifics of the many individual cases, because the last time I did that, the thread was deleted.



reptile logic said:


> You can't always have things your own way


I'm quite aware. However, I was hoping for the chance of a fair trial, or at least a sufficiently detailed summary of how I violated the rules. But yeah, it looks like that doesn't happen here.



reptile logic said:


> the squeaky wheel doesn't always get greased. Sometimes folks just let it wear out 'till it falls off the wagon.


I guess the FA+ subscriptions, ad revenue and upcoming 'furrification' payments (ugh) will continue to keep the wheels barely-greased, sadly.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Nov 27, 2022)

reptile logic said:


> To the OP, I truly feel sorry for you. To feel so victimized that you can't let go of this must be horrific, in your own mind. To many of the rest of us, your plight feels comically tedious; bordering on ridiculous.


Nah, speak for yourself.  I am actually surprised that admins let you get away with purposely trying to troll and antagonize him.

I am just telling him to give it up and let it go, because _*even if*_  he is right, and *even if* he argues his point perfectly, mods/admins will be so invested in it at this point *(at least in my experience on multiple sites other than this one)*, that it has become an issue of pride and ego for them, so they will never change course at this point, *NO MATTER WHAT*. Continuing to push the issue only has negatives and no possible benefits for the OP.

I understand pushing the issue of the matter of your principles, but if you're committed to that, you'll also have to do so with the possibility of leaving the site held firmly in your mind.  I have done the same thing on sites before, completely deleting my account and moving on from them on a matter of priinciple.



luffy said:


> This is untrue for us.  We have training sessions, both group and individual.


Cool, but I have no way of confirming that, and you have stated, yourself, that you can not provide evidence to support it.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 27, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> Nah, speak for yourself. I am actually surprised that admins let you get away with purposely trying to troll and antagonize him.


It's okay. He's entitled to that opinion, and similarly for the others on the first page of this thread.



DesecratedFlame said:


> it has become an issue of pride and ego, so they will never change course at this point, *NO MATTER WHAT*.


Possibly. Even the worst of politicians can make u-turns sometimes. But even though I'm not holding out much hope for that, I'd like to think that some of these discussions might result in fewer miscarriages of justice in the future because I know who's reading them.



DesecratedFlame said:


> you'll also have to do so with the possibility of leaving the site in your mind.


It's under consideration. However, doing that means I lose my voice (if it isn't taken from me in the meantime). I have other things in mind for now.


----------



## RamblingRenegade (Nov 27, 2022)

Beating a dead horse
					

An image tagged beating a dead horse




					imgflip.com


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Nov 27, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> It's under consideration. However, doing that means I lose my voice (if it isn't taken from me in the meantime). I have other things in mind for now.


It's not really losing your voice to refuse to participate in what you consider a rigged system. Walking out is also manner of speech. 

Like I said before, I have never had an issue with mods on this site, but I have had issues with mods on other sites.  I know from experience, that you do _*NOT*_ have a voice in those situations beyond what they allow you. They can delete anything you post.  They can delete your posts justifying and explaining your position, then misrepresent the out of context posts that remain. They can mute you from further posting, so that they get the last word. They can make rulings that make no sense, then when you appeal, close the appeals with no explaination or a simple "cause we said so." They can threaten you not to speak of the topic again, and block you from opening new tickets. They can start going over all of your posts with a fine tooth comb to find anything that can even remotely  stretched to touch on a rule violation to infract you, even if they do the same and worse in all of their own posts. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Sometimes, the only open you have left is to close your account and refuse to participate in the system.  I have done, just that on other sites, and eventually those sites went under.  And no, I am not arrogant enough to believe that my leaving alone was enough to tank the site.  The issue was, that they did this same thing over and over again, let the power go to their heads, and more and more people started leaving until only the mods little clique remained, and that was not enough to keep the lights on, so to speak.

So again, I never had an issue with the mods on here, but if you do, you have to be willing to entertain the idea of walking away, cause sometimes, that is the only method of speech you have left.


----------



## TyraWadman (Nov 27, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> Cool, but I have no way of confirming that, and you have stated, yourself, that you can not provide evidence to support it.


As a call center employee we have to sign NDA's and everything. We can't just give out every little detail to our customers just because they ask. FA volunteers sign NDA's and even when they try to help explain the situation and offer feedback (from current *and* former staff), a lot of people still choose to ignore it, harass _them_, and treat them as an enemy.

_They also probably chose not to volunteer, sign the NDA, and see for themselves what's on the other side! _



DesecratedFlame said:


> I am just telling him to give it up and let it go, because _*even if*_  he is right, and *even if* he argues his point perfectly, mods/admins will be so invested in it at this point *(at least in my experience on multiple sites other than this one)*, that it has become an issue of pride and ego for them, so they will never change course at this point, *NO MATTER WHAT*. Continuing to push the issue only has negatives and no possible benefits for the OP.



I wish people would at least consider this advice more often.

If I feel I've been wronged, I move my business where it'll be appreciated. I don't think people should be complete doormats (racism, sexism, the more extreme and legal stuff) but to argue what they should and should not allow on a website (a service you're not paying to access) is as ridonkulous as expecting them to make you an exception of the rule.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 27, 2022)

TyraWadman said:


> but to argue what they should and should not allow on a website (a service you're not paying to access) is as ridonkulous as expecting them to make you an exception of the rule.


That's not what I'm trying to do. I'm simply asking that they either:
1) follow the AUP as a reasonable person would interpret it, without reading between the lines, or
2) rewrite the rules to reflect how they actually moderate the site.


----------



## TyraWadman (Nov 27, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> That's not what I'm trying to do. I'm simply asking that they either:
> 1) follow the AUP as a reasonable person would interpret it, without reading between the lines, or
> 2) rewrite the rules to reflect how they actually moderate the site.











						Terms of Service -- Fur Affinity [dot] net
					

Fur Affinity | For all things fluff, scaled, and feathered!




					www.furaffinity.net
				











						Twitter Terms of Service
					

Read Twitter’s Terms of Service to understand the rules governing your access of all Twitter services.




					twitter.com
				











						Terms of Service | DeviantArt
					

DeviantArt is the world's largest online social community for artists and art enthusiasts, allowing people to connect through the creation and sharing of art.




					www.deviantart.com
				




You use all of these websites. I personally think FA is easier to digest. 

At this point you're better off consulting with a lawyer to learn why a website uses the language that it does. Saves them from a lot of grief and from crazy lawsuits in the long run.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 27, 2022)

TyraWadman said:


> I personally think FA is easier to digest.


I agree. However, the rules (as I and others understand them) don't seem to match the way in which they are actioned by staff (I'm mostly talking about section 3.2 of the AUP). That's the issue at hand. I know there's no point in going full Legal Eagle mode on this, but I really hope 'a director' will take note and fix the inconsistencies one way or the other.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Nov 27, 2022)

TyraWadman said:


> As a call center employee we have to sign NDA's and everything. We can't just give out every little detail to our customers just because they ask. FA volunteers sign NDA's and even when they try to help explain the situation and offer feedback (from current *and* former staff), a lot of people still choose to ignore it, harass _them_, and treat them as an enemy.


Main difference is that a call center job is a paid position and has potentially million if not billions of dollars backing it, so there is more of an expectation of proper training. (Like AT&T isn't going to put non-vetted, non-trained people on the phones and risk millions of dollars in penalties and lawsuits.) You also have direct evidence of the behind the scenes stuff because of the canned responses, and the links they send you to customer facing tutorials and such that also tie into that backend training and systems. 

Not to mention those companies tend to be heavily regulated by law.  Additionally, they tend to have a formal appeals process, which at the highest level is handled by arbitration, aka a back and forth conversation, where both parties explain their stance, then a third party arbiter makes their ruling based on what they have seen and heard and the public facing rules and regulations governing the issue. The do NOT just say, "you're wrong because we say so, now you are never allowed to mention this again, deal with it!"


----------



## TyraWadman (Nov 27, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> Main difference is that a call center job is a paid position and has potentially million if not billions of dollars backing it, so there is more of an expectation of proper training. (Like AT&T isn't going to put non-vetted, non-trained people on the phones and risk millions of dollars in penalties and lawsuits.) You also have direct evidence of the behind the scenes stuff because of the canned responses, and the links they send you to customer facing tutorials and such that also tie into that backend training and systems.



Right. Smaller companies also can't AFFORD to lose what little money they have compared to the larger corporations. So it makes sense that they'd have policies and procedures in place to make sure their community-funded site doesn't flop and leave them bankrupt. You also have to comply with the laws for the place where the site is hosted. 

Unless of course you mean something as simple as a discord chat group, then yea. That's silly and millions of those can be made with almost no consequence. But discord itself can come under fire if someone were hosting a server filled with illegal content and tried to pretend it never existed.



DesecratedFlame said:


> "you're wrong because we say so, now you are never allowed to mention this again, deal with it!"



I mean... I've experienced it and the company is still running. If the owner also controls his social media and runs the help center and blocks you on every platform, there's not much one can do.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Nov 27, 2022)

TyraWadman said:


> Right. Smaller companies also can't AFFORD to lose what little money they have compared to the larger corporations. So it makes sense that they'd have policies and procedures in place to make sure their community-funded site doesn't flop and leave them bankrupt. You also have to comply with the laws for the place where the site is hosted.


No, I mean small companies being run the way Musk is running Twitter, with arrogance, a lack of self-reflections, and a refusal to listen to anyone outside of the clique.

Like Musk bought Twitter and started running it like his own private club. Within a single month of Musk taking over, Twitter lost 50 of its top 100 advertisers, who have spent around 2 billion on the site, and 750 million in 2022 alone.


----------



## TyraWadman (Nov 27, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> No, I mean small companies being run the way Musk is running Twitter, with arrogance, a lack of self-reflections, and a refusal to listen to anyone outside of the clique.
> 
> Like Musk bought Twitter and started running it like his own private club. Within a single month of Musk taking over, Twitter lost 50 of its top 100 advertisers, who have spent around 2 billion on the site, and 750 million in 2022 alone.



FA doesn't make money like twitter so... not sure where this was supposed to lead. 
What happened with twitter is definitely sensationalized but is no loss for me. And given his reaction-based marketing for the past few years, I'm really not surprised.  XD


----------



## quoting_mungo (Nov 28, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> I agree. However, the rules (as I and others understand them) don't seem to match the way in which they are actioned by staff (I'm mostly talking about section 3.2 of the AUP). That's the issue at hand. I know there's no point in going full Legal Eagle mode on this, but I really hope 'a director' will take note and fix the inconsistencies one way or the other.


I could have sworn I’d said it before, but I’ll say it again: adult photography, legally, requires model release forms on file. FA doesn’t have a system in place for this (nor I suspect the resources to maintain such a system, so I don’t think it’s ever going to be an option), so adult photography becomes a legal liability.

If you rate your photography higher than General, you’re indicating that it’s adult photography. By extension, it’s photography that should have a model release form on file. So, legal liability, and it needs to go. I get that the intent of the uploader may have been different, but I don’t think your tune would have been all that different if your friend had instead been dinged for misrating their submissions.

(Obligatory disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and especially not a US lawyer, so what I say about legal liability and responsibility above is based on my understanding alone.)

The rules are _never_ going to match the way everyone understands them, for anything the least bit complicated. Like, even the super-straightforward, tick-the-box, it’s-there-or-it-isn’t policy FA put into place regarding hate group symbols gets people worked up because they believe it shouldn’t apply to that picture they drew of their fursona burning a Nazi flag. (I get why they feel that expression like theirs shouldn’t be prohibited. That’s fine. But I’ve seen people speak as though the rule _is being misapplied_ when enforced against them.)

This thread is, at this point, frankly pointless. Multiple people are essentially saying they won’t take current or past staff’s word for it that there’s training for new staff members or that internal guiding documents for uniform enforcement exist. Some people seem to be suggesting that one reason to doubt is that appeals are turned down.

Staff training and internal enforcement policy will by their nature result in fewer appeals being granted. Because they fulfill their purpose of creating more uniform enforcement.


----------



## luffy (Nov 28, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> Like AT&T isn't going to put non-vetted, non-trained people on the phones and risk millions of dollars in penalties and lawsuits.


I wasn't going to reply initially because this hit home for me. Haha. I sold AT&T and got more training for Fur Affinity than I did AT&T's services.

Quoting is right.


----------



## Flamingo (Nov 28, 2022)

Didn't realize this was still going.


----------



## TrixieFox (Nov 28, 2022)

Flamingo said:


> Didn't realize this was still going.


I've decided not to get in this debate so I just watch others do it


----------



## Mambi (Nov 28, 2022)

Flamingo said:


> Didn't realize this was still going.



BTW, here's a picture for you that I stumbled across you can use for the manual coverpage:


----------



## TrixieFox (Nov 28, 2022)

Mambi said:


> BTW, here's a picture for you that I stumbled across you can use for the manual coverpage:


WOAH


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Nov 28, 2022)

luffy said:


> I wasn't going to reply initially because this hit home for me. Haha. I sold AT&T and got more training for Fur Affinity than I did AT&T's services.
> 
> Quoting is right.


AT&T makes you sit through a full month to a month and a half of training. 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for 4 to 6 weeks.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 28, 2022)

quoting_mungo said:


> I could have sworn I’d said it before, but I’ll say it again: adult photography, legally, requires model release forms on file. FA doesn’t have a system in place for this (nor I suspect the resources to maintain such a system, so I don’t think it’s ever going to be an option), so adult photography becomes a legal liability.


Yep, I remember that. It's an interesting theory, but in order for it to become relevant, we'd have to see the two following things happen:

1) Moderators actually cite this as a reason when they delete stuff.
2) Model release forms actually appearing somewhere in the AUP.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 28, 2022)

Flamingo said:


> Didn't realize this was still going.


Would it help _at all_, if I put together a compilation of case studies regarding AUP 3.2 and make a new thread suggesting what should be done to resolve the issue?


----------



## Rayd (Nov 28, 2022)

FA mods when they saw the _supposed  _training manual


----------



## luffy (Nov 28, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> AT&T makes you sit through a full month to a month and a half of training. 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for 4 to 6 weeks.


Not the AT&T I worked for. Sales is probably very different.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Nov 28, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> Yep, I remember that. It's an interesting theory, but in order for it to become relevant, we'd have to see the two following things happen:
> 
> 1) Moderators actually cite this as a reason when they delete stuff.
> 2) Model release forms actually appearing somewhere in the AUP.


That’s an interesting interpretation. :V

What it comes down to is ultimately this: by rating the submissions as non-General, the poster indicates they consider the ropes (in this case) to be adult paraphernalia and/or the context to be sexual (arguably in violation of AUP 3.1). 

Legal liability means FA needs to take photography with people in it hella seriously. It’s a reason FA can’t be more lenient/flexible on enforcement with this subset of photography violations. That’s how it is and will continue to be relevant. If you don’t consider your photos sexual, don’t rate them as though they are.

Mentioning model release forms in the AUP would be silly, since they’re something FA does not handle. I can’t think of any existing rule that mentions features FA doesn’t have in order to justify their existence.

I personally wouldn’t have posted ropework to FA without asking _first_, in the first place. That’s why there’s a whole “question about site policy” ticket category. Because ropework absolutely has the capacity to be artful, but also comes with connotations that may make it unsuitable for a gallery like FA. That’s no judgment on shibari as art. Just recognition of the fact that when in doubt it does behoove you (gen) to ask questions instead of just forging ahead.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Nov 28, 2022)

quoting_mungo said:


> That’s an interesting interpretation. :V


This interpretation is based on the assumption that FA staff want the rules of the site to be transparent to the user, of course. This comes back to the 'you cannot post a picture of an apple' argument. Mods can delete pictures of oranges too if they want, but that's not exactly fair, is it?



quoting_mungo said:


> What it comes down to is ultimately this: by rating the submissions as non-General [...]


I've got counter-evidence of submissions being deleted that were rated as general, so we have to investigate further.



quoting_mungo said:


> I personally wouldn’t have posted ropework to FA without asking _first_, in the first place. That’s why there’s a whole “question about site policy” ticket category.


That would place an undue burden on the admins. It would be far better to update the rules so they are easy for people to look up the answers. Of the dozens of people who have had their work deleted, none of them thought they were breaking the AUP, because _of course they wouldn't_. The way it's currently written only covers explicit sex, nudity and sex objects, with no mention of things which _might_ be considered kinky by _some_ people.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Nov 29, 2022)

luffy said:


> Not the AT&T I worked for. Sales is probably very different.


After highschool and before college, I spent time working in AT&T's BEUC department. It required a 6 week training course, 5 full time days per week, complete with tests and practicals. They also ran thorough background checks on you since you would have access to customers records and would often been dealing with their credit card numbers.  They also had their own sort of internal version of something like google that contained information on pretty much everything, including canned responses (aka scripts you had to read from per situation), how to fix certain problems, guidelines on what you could do in certain situations, how to escalate issues, etc. That same system tied into the customer side with things like device tutorials.  Etc.


----------



## Flamingo (Nov 29, 2022)

Rayd said:


> FA mods when they saw the _supposed  _training manual


You're so funny.


----------



## luffy (Nov 29, 2022)

Flamingo said:


> You're so funny.


Can you summarize the video, please?  It's too long.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Dec 16, 2022)

This thread killed the forums, lol.


----------



## luffy (Dec 16, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> This thread killed the forums, lol.


This is nothing compared to the politics forum days.  lol.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Dec 16, 2022)

luffy said:


> This is nothing compared to the politics forum days.  lol.


Maybe but that suspicious timing, lol.


----------



## luffy (Dec 16, 2022)

DesecratedFlame said:


> Maybe but that suspicious timing, lol.


This has been chatted about for years.  If we waited longer, there would just be another topic kinda similar to this one that would have been "that suspicious thread".


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Dec 25, 2022)

Merry Lockmas everyone! 

Since this is one of the few threads of mine that's still open, I'd like to use it to ask a few policy-related questions.

I don't see any rule against replying to old threads ('necroing') if the reply is on topic, but I want to ask anyway for clarity: are you going to slap me with a 3.1 for replying to a thread whose topic was similar to some of my own?
I'm considering writing some things on my FA profile, journal and submission footer, and I'd like to get confirmation that these statements (or ones written to the same effect) are not violations of the CoC (and if you think they are, please point out which words/phrases you are taking issue with):
"Future pictures will be uploaded later than on other platforms, and will be in lower resolution. This is due to the way my friends and I been treated by FA administrators during the period Oct-Dec 2022."
"I may, at my own discretion, choose to not engage with users who are subscribed to FA+."
"Unfortunately I have lost faith in FurAffinity's trouble ticket system & appeal process, and no longer believe I have sufficient free speech privileges in the forums to raise issues I consider to be important to the community. At this time, I'm not sure if such problems may carry over onto the Discord next year."
"I believe there are serious shortcomings in section 3.2 of the AUP which, evidence shows, have resulted in confusion among dozens of people, hundreds of submissions being deleted, and several users being suspended over the last decade."


----------



## vickers (Dec 25, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> "Future pictures will be uploaded later than on other platforms, and will be in lower resolution. This is due to the way my friends and I been treated by FA administrators during the period Oct-Dec 2022."


At this point you might as well stop uploading on FA. Just an advice, I get having an urge to be on every single platform but at some point you gotta weight the pros and cons of each platform. Considering the posts on this thread FA clearly seems to have more cons than pros to you... if you have accounts on other sites, why not just keep to those?


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 25, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> I'm considering writing some things on my FA profile, journal and submission footer, and I'd like to get confirmation that these statements (or ones written to the same effect) are not violations of the CoC (and if you think they are, please point out which words/phrases you are taking issue with):


https://www.furaffinity.net/controls/troubletickets/ >> Question about Site Policy

Like, "these are things I'd like to post, would that be okay?" is the* textbook* case of when that ticket category should be used. It's not a question with an answer that will be universally applicable (unless some of your friends want to post the same statements verbatim, I suppose), so there's absolutely no value added by bringing it up on the forum. Wanting a definite go-ahead for statements "written to the same effect" is also... not going to be possible. Take your suggested "This is due to the way my friends and I been treated by FA administrators during the period Oct-Dec 2022." It would be laughably easy to reword it in a way that would be decidedly not okay, while still communicating a very similar message. I'm not, note, saying whether it is or is not okay as it stands, just saying that it's a statement that you can't expect to get a non-specific paraphrasing approved in advance for.

Hell, context outside of the specific sentences can change the reading of the sentences themselves.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Dec 25, 2022)

vickers said:


> At this point you might as well stop uploading on FA.


Maybe eventually. In the meantime, I think it's more effective to softly encourage people to follow me on my other platforms first.



quoting_mungo said:


> Like, "these are things I'd like to post, would that be okay?" is the* textbook* case of when that ticket category should be used


As you may recall from previous threads, I used the trouble ticket system in the textbook way several times and it didn't work. Hence quote #3 in my list of statements. Also, I'd rather have the answer publicly visible in case an admin decides to take action against me anyway. I'm sorry, but I feel like this level of paranoia and forward planning is now necessary based on past experience.


----------



## DUVMik (Dec 26, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> Merry Lockmas everyone!
> 
> Since this is one of the few threads of mine that's still open, I'd like to use it to ask a few policy-related questions.
> 
> ...


So you're going to punish your viewers? I'm starting to think your friend doesn't exist and you just want to cause drama.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Dec 26, 2022)

DUVMik said:


> So you're going to punish your viewers? I'm starting to think your friend doesn't exist and you just want to cause drama.


It's called sending a message, and it's better than the alternative of simply deleting my account. Directing people to another site for higher-res art isn't a punishment, not is it uncommon. If you want evidence about which of my friends were affected and how, you can check out my DA journals, since I'm not _'at liberty'_ to give the details here.


----------



## DUVMik (Dec 26, 2022)

A message to whom? Do you really think that the administration care about you. All you do is punish your viewers. By uploading a lower resolution you're actually helping the site by not using as much storage space. If you're unhappy with the site you should just leave. I think that's best for everyone.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Dec 26, 2022)

DUVMik said:


> A message to whom?


To people who could be affected by the aforementioned problems with the AUP.


DUVMik said:


> Do you really think that the administration care about you


Clearly, no. That has been established.


DUVMik said:


> By uploading a lower resolution you're actually helping the site by not using as much storage space.


Honestly, insignificant. I don't upload much anyway.


DUVMik said:


> If you're unhappy with the site you should just leave


As mentioned above, maybe, eventually.

Anyway, you're welcome to ignore my threads if you don't like it. I'll be ignoring further criticism but you're welcome to ask constructive questions.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Dec 26, 2022)

DUVMik said:


> A message to whom? Do you really think that the administration care about you. All you do is punish your viewers. By uploading a lower resolution you're actually helping the site by not using as much storage space. If you're unhappy with the site you should just leave. I think that's best for everyone.


They cared enough to shutdown the forums after this thread was made.


----------



## DUVMik (Dec 26, 2022)

RestrainedRaptor said:


> Anyway, you're welcome to ignore my threads if you don't like it. I'll be ignoring further criticism but you're welcome to ask constructive questions.


Drama it is then. Good to know.


----------



## GuffinDoesArt (Dec 27, 2022)

DUVMik said:


> By uploading a lower resolution you're actually helping the site by not using as much storage space.


Image resolution ≠ file size. Storage space is measured by file size, and the file size restriction has always been 10mb. Even images that were uploaded using the resolution limit "loophole" still met the website's file size restriction, despite being well over the resolution limit. If anything, uploading images and having them resized to FA's resolution limit takes up _more_ server space [1].


----------



## luffy (Dec 29, 2022)

Yeah, totes. We replaced it with a more active platform because we don't want people asking about our handbook haha. /s


DesecratedFlame said:


> They cared enough to shutdown the forums after this thread was made.


----------



## ConorHyena (Dec 29, 2022)

luffy said:


> Yeah, totes. We replaced it with a more active platform because we don't want people asking about our handbook haha. /s


you fiend. Now we have uncovered your dastardly plan.

Fetch the pitchforks!


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Dec 29, 2022)

luffy said:


> Yeah, totes.


I guess we'll have to wait and see whether Discord forum threads are more or less frequently derailed...



RestrainedRaptor said:


> Since this is one of the few threads of mine that's still open, I'd like to use it to ask a few policy-related questions. ...


But yeah, I'd really appreciate it if I could get some answers to these, from you or another staff member.


----------



## DesecratedFlame (Dec 29, 2022)

luffy said:


> Yeah, totes. We replaced it with a more active platform because we don't want people asking about our handbook haha. /s


If by "asking about handbooks" you mean, "don't want people questioning our decisions in an easy-to-find, publicly-accessible, google-searchable way" then yes, "because handbooks."


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Dec 30, 2022)

Well, happy Shutdown-Eve everybody. Just a couple more things I'd like to say (and these are, once again, my own opinions, not to be construed as misrepresentation of policy or staff actions)...

I get the impression that certain staff having seen my questions in this thread and not even acknowledging their existence, while _still_ replying to subsequent comments in the thread, shows a continuation of the pattern that developed at the point where my journals were deleted, i.e. "if we don't give him an answer, we can suspend him later with plausible deniability." _If_ this is true, it is of course deeply disappointing. I'm still waiting for someone to show any evidence to the contrary.

If I don't get answers to those two questions before the forums close, which is the most likely outcome at this point, I'll be putting them into a trouble ticket (despite my lack of faith in how they're handled) so we'll see how that goes, one way or another. More time down the drain.

Finally, I wanted to restate that I never would have needed to write this thread, or many of those before it, if we could have just had an open and honest discussion about the AUP, what it's intended to do, and why it confuses people. I really feel like I've tried everything here. It's so frustrating to see a company of any size handling public relations in this manner. I raised these concerns to help _you and your users_.

You can still turn this around in 2023 if you're just willing to listen to, and sympathize with us ('us' being me and the friends I represent) rather than doubling-down on punishing us.


----------



## RestrainedRaptor (Dec 31, 2022)

_Sadly_ I won't be around for the chaos later because I'll be celebrating NYE at a club with friends tonight. Peace out, yo.


----------

