Folder General: i3 rules debate

 From:  Capo
 To:  CyberTiger   25 Oct 2006
177.21 In reply to 177.20 
I'm really sorry, but the idea that we should move to a new channel is quite offensive. Yes, it's cratylus' router and he makes the rules, but he has to take account of the fact that when he invited muds to join igossip he was inviting a preexisting community with it's own rules on what is and isn't acceptable.

I have to disagree with you here. I have to ask you two questions:

1- Would it be within Cratylus's right to ban all i-gossip type channels that go through his router?

2- Would it be better if Cratylus just banned all channels except for the DS community channels?

I think the obvious answer to number 1 is that Crat can, and it would be reasonable for him to do so if the "i-gossip community" fails to conform to some level of acceptable behavior... ie following the rules.

Would it be better? Probably not.
  Reply Reply Reply as PM Print Mark as unread Relationship IP: Logged 

 From:  cratylus
 To:  CyberTiger   25 Oct 2006
177.22 In reply to 177.20 


This could have been a nasty flamestorm, and I
appreciate how people are at least making the effort to
be civil, instead. Thank you.


Let me address a couple of points, not to refute or argue,
but just to try to explain where I'm coming from.

* I don't think it's fair to arbitrarily make people move from igossip,
and that is not what I'm advocating. People are used to ig
for random chatting, and that was pretty much what I set it up for.

* What I *do* think is fair is to enforce the rules, which
are basically the same rules that gjs had.

* I am *not* asking people to be polite on ig, or refrain
from swearing, or withhold their questionable political beliefs.

* Given that these are not new rules, I think it's fair to
have the position that if the rules don't suit someone, they
can simply avoid the channel. This isn't an arbitrary forced exodus, in
my opinion, but rather an individual choice that mud admins can
make, if they really really need to feel free to make racist comments.

I think that one of the biggest sources of FUD here is that people
don't know what happened.

I kept things quiet, not because I'm trying to hide anything, but
simply because I wasn't interested in public denunciations. My feeling
was that if the muds in question wanted to go public about the
events, fine, but in the meantime, handling things privately was the
Right Thing To Do.

I'm still inclined to think that's a good policy. But I recognize
that the general good may be best served by transparency.

In the interest of that transparency, here's a summary of what happened.

Haven and Nanvaent each have a person who is known to make racist
remarks. For the past couple of months, whenever I see it happen, I
have been using tells to ask them to knock it off. I've been using tells
because I am not that comfortable with thundering publicly from above.
I preferred to keep things collegial and avoid public confrontations.

My conversations with Duuk@Haven on the subject have not been very
fruitful. I've been unable to get a commitment from him to stick to
the rules, and he's continued his behavior. Since he is admin of
his mud, there's nobody else to appeal to. There's no means to get
him to stop locally. As much as I disliked doing it, I felt that
there is no point to having rules if all you do is warn but not
enforce. So after the dozenth or so violation from him, I banned Haven
from intergossip.

Note that I didn't kick him off the router, and his other muds aren't
banned. I sent him an email telling him that all he needed to do to
get back on was ask. This is because this banning was not intended to
be "punishment". I wanted to get his attention and make him realize
that I really did mean it.

It was a very limited ban...just one channel, just one mud, in order
to emphasize to him that racist slurs really actually won't be tolerated.

The attitude of Corvin@Nanvaent has basically been the same. I've
nagged and warned, to little apparent effect. I went so far as to
email the admin contacts for Nanvaent, asking for help, but got
no response. Eventually I decided that, as with Duuk, enough was
enough. In this case, since there seemed to be no admin supervision
at Nan willing to deal with Corvin, I decided that banning them from
intergossip would be the only way to get things to change.

Again, as limited a ban as I could make it. Just one channel.

CyberTiger, I have very much been trying to handle this in a way that
avoided bans. It is the very last resort, and I could think of
no other way that would be effective in getting those muds to comply
with the channel rules.

Obviously, if you don't recognize the fairness of the rules in the
first place, then that whole story I just told is moot. But at
least it should be a little clearer that I didn't go on a rampage
because Duuk voted the wrong way or Corvin insulted my parents.

There is one other ban I should mention, while I'm unloading here,
and that's a person named Zaroth. As well meaning as he apparently
is, he seems incapable of controlling himself on the ds channel,
and creates arguments, spam, and generally interferes with the
stated topic of the channel.

Yes, I've spoken with him countless times, explaining what he
needs to do, what he needs to avoid. But in the end, his behavior
does not change, so his mud has been banned from ds.

Again. A limited ban, for reasons explained to him, which he was given
numerous opportunities to avoid.

My actions have been aimed squarely at enforcing the stated rules,
which I think are a *BENEFIT* to the community. This is why it's
staggering to me to hear again the notion that I'm destroying
anything. Let me re-extra-emphasize: swear, be rude, be wrong
on ig. I-don't-care. But I will enforce the router rules, *not*
because "it's my router, nyaah", but because I truly honestly
think that the community is best served by it.

Someone mentioned before (on the log I think) a point which
bears repeating. The yatmim router exists because I felt the
gjs router was 1) unreliable 2) toxic to new muds. So, like a
good netizen, rather than complain, I made my own. Showing up
and telling me I have to make yatmim be like gjs because
tradition dictates it is not reasonable.

Yes, things are a little different. But that's a *feature*,
not a bug. And it blows my mind that I'm accused of destroying
the I3 community, when all I'm doing is enforcing rules
everyone knows and have been around since well before I showed up.

I'm not responsible for the death of gjs, and I'm not
responsible for resurrecting it. yatmim isn't destroying anything.

It's just six channels. My little brain cannot accept the
premise that it's better to shut down yatmim than enforce rules
on six channels.

Anyway, this probably came off a bit more hostile that I
meant. I'm not addressing that hostility at you, CT, honest. It's
just a general frustration I felt while writing.


  Reply Reply Reply as PM Print Mark as unread Relationship IP: Logged 

 From:  Shigs
 To:  ALL
I fully support Crat on this one.

Liam "Shigs" Closs
Mud Cheater.

  Reply Reply Reply as PM Print Mark as unread Relationship IP: Logged 

 From:  cratylus
 To:  ALL

I think there's a sort of consensus. I'm drawing that
conclusion from this thread and from discussions on
intergossip ( ).

The consensus seems to be "the rules themselves are not the problem".

I'm saying this because, you'll forgive me if I missed someone's
post to the contrary, but people don't seem to be arguing that
the rules are bad, and the poll results thus far seem to
support this by ten to one.

It seems to me that the problem isn't the rules, but the
manner in which they are enforced.

In my previous post I explained my reasoning, and I think it should
serve as some evidence of my intent and effort to be fair. Given
that I'm just one guy and I run the hardware and software for the
router, it seemed logical, indeed inescapably obvious, that I was
going to have to be the one to actually do anything about it when
a rule was broken.

It seems though, that this appears excessively unilateral to some
folks, and this is a source of anger. It seems as though the problem
is that I'm "judge, jury, and executioner", and that's not okay with them.

I'm really not sure how else things could be on a router run
by one person, where rules are enforced. One theoretical
"solution" (which assumes there is a problem to be solved) involves
a change in i3 topology to a decentralized system. That's just
fine by me, and I'll be happy to participate in the implementation
of such a thing.

In the meantime, though, if the problem isn't the rules, but that
there's just one guy enforcing them as he sees fit, then I just
don't know how that gets "fixed".

When yatmim started out, igossip was intended to be friendly and
PG-13 rated, like ds. When the gjs refugees came, I realized that
I needed to make a compromise. I pulled intergossip from the
ds distro as a default channel, and stopped trying to encourage
politeness on that channel. You'll note I'm just as crude there
as anyone.

But I see no need at all for exempting ig from the "main channel"
rules of yatmim, and that's the only compromise left for me to make.
I mean, honestly. How necessary is it, really, to be able to use
racial slurs? Is it truly that important to trick newbies into deleting their
hard drives?

I don't think these things are ok. I'm the only guy that I can
think of will be running the router, so I'm the only guy I'm aware
of that can enforce what few rules apply to the few channels
reserved to *have* rules.

If this is a problem, I'm not sure I'm smart enough to figure out
how to fix it. Maybe we can concentrate on a new decentralized
i3 spec that will relieve any one person of this sort of burden.


  Reply Reply Reply as PM Print Mark as unread Relationship IP: Logged 

Reply to All Reply to All



Show messages:  1-20  21-24

View Results

Beehive Forum 0.6.3 |  FAQ |  Docs |  Support |  Donate! ©2002 - 2007 Project Beehive Forum

 Forum Stats:  
  0 guests 0 members 0 anonymous members [ View Complete List ]  
  Our members have made a total of 222 threads and 1,068 posts  
  Longest thread is 'Conversion Notes' with 52 posts.  
  There have been 0 posts made in the last 60 minutes  
  Most posts ever made in a single 60 minute period was 14 on 26 Sep 2006  
  We have 79 registered members The newest member is adam_g (ALDUMGEE).  
  Most users ever online was 27 on 12 Oct 2006