A Lack of Common Courtesy: A mini-essay on social norms

[AniX]

When you see someone urinating on the floor, give them the option of stopping. If they continue to do it or do it again, you tell them to leave. If they don't, you make them.

But MBL's policy is a bit stricter. Its basically you speak out, you step out of line, you commit what a group of people deem a faux pas, step out of line sir. Remove your clothing. Empty your pockets. Show me your passport. Are you, or have you ever been, a spammer?

I'm not opposed to a hard line stance against those who refuse to listen after repeatively more passive responses. I'm opposed to, as MBL put it, being told to "suck it up or hit the road" if I seemingly oppose anything at all that the majority supports.

I worry when a mod/bouncer is given "free reign" to "rough up" somebody for doing anything that is deemed to be giving mafascum a "bad reputation". Power corrupts. One of the things I liked about mafiascum is mith always was laissez-faire whenever possible. He was the "bar owner" if we want to continue using that metaphor, who allowed patrons to speak freely and come and go as they pleased. You don't even need to order a drink to be considered part of the community and remain.

I liked that kind of bar. If the bar turns into a "Don't get out of your chair unless you are leaving or going to the bathroom. You have a problem with the rules, fuck off. Criticize the management, kiss your ass goodbye" establishment, its not the same bar anymore.

[Mr. Flay]

/agree Primate, Shea.

I'm not entirely sure that Primate was agreeing with Shea; I thought he was saying he agreed with MBL...

Anyway, I don't think our Site/List Mods here have shown any tendencies toward Nazi-dom, but there's a certain amount of laissez-faire that's good and there's an amount that allows a subversive undercurrent to exist. Trolls are very good at living just under the line of unacceptable when it suits them, but if that line is above where normal people will leave, I consider that a net loss for the site.

[Primate]

I was agreeing with MBL, and against Shea.

When you see someone urinating on the floor, give them the option of stopping.

*boggles* Pretty sure you fail at the metaphoring here anix.

And I think the argument that 'power corrupts so no-one should have power' is pretty retarded.

One of the things I liked about mafiascum is mith always was laissez-faire whenever possible. He was the "bar owner" if we want to continue using that metaphor, who allowed patrons to speak freely and come and go as they pleased. You don't even need to order a drink to be considered part of the community and remain.

I think your argument is pretty much BS. You're saying that GD and MD is a better place

philosophically

for having the dicks around. Well, that's all very well, but we're a philsophically shiny place with a bunch of dicks hanging around. To continue this bar metaphor, it's not like we're kicking out half the locals, we're kicking out the people starting fights with you and vomiting in your face. 'We allow anyone in this bar! We even allow the people smelling of urine!' would not be a decent way to run a bar, or indeed any community.

I don't know whether this has been mentioned, but in games people should be able to do whatever they please. I'm only supporting this for the non-mafia forums. In a game thread, the moderator of the game is the ultimate authority.

Trolls are very good at living just under the line of unacceptable when it suits them, but if that line is above where normal people will leave, I consider that a net loss for the site.

We should only get rid of trolls if they become too obvious, not go out of our way to do so.

[MrBuddyLee]

I would liken mafiascum to a party at mith's house more than his bar. If someone is clearly disruptive and harassing to the point that the party CANNOT survive with their tomfoolery, mith kindly asks them to leave his home... But MBL's policy is a bit stricter. Its basically you speak out, you step out of line, you commit what a group of people deem a faux pas, step out of line sir. Remove your clothing. Empty your pockets. Show me your passport. Are you, or have you ever been, a spammer?

In like 24 years of throwing parties, I've never had to ask anyone to leave. I've never had to empty anyone's pockets or interrogate them about where the puke in the corner came from. Any clothing removal is voluntary. This is all because my friends and friends of my friends give a shit about other people more than they give a shit about their impulsive primitive liberty to wreck things. The issue of personal liberty never comes up because people don't push their "rights" to the breaking point. For the most part they know when to say when, and that's where most parties differ from what's happening at this site: here, there are a few nitwits whose mommies/girlfriends haven't taught them courtesy yet. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but are they all young males?)

I'm opposed to, as MBL put it, being told to "suck it up or hit the road" if I seemingly oppose anything at all that the majority supports.

If you don't like paying taxes, you'll eventually need to suck it up or hit the road. If you believe you're entitled to other people's personal property, you'll eventually be forced to change your mind or hit the road. If you like being a slob and your roommates can't accept that, eventually you'll have to clean up your act or hit the road. If you hate sex and your girlfriend's from the Paris Hilton School of Carpet Burn, yeah, I know, this is getting repetitive.

If the bar turns into a "Don't get out of your chair unless you are leaving or going to the bathroom. You have a problem with the rules, fuck off. Criticize the management, kiss your ass goodbye" establishment, its not the same bar anymore.

It's amusing that you've changed the proposed set of bar rules here from what I wrote to some innocuous crap no bar would ever have an issue with. Why don't you have the balls to call a spade a spade:

Don't piss, puke or fight in the bar. You have a problem with the rules, we can discuss it. Criticize the management, be prepared to defend your opinions.

If you told your local pub that a "NO PISSING IN THE BAR" sign was too authoritarian, the bartenders would probably shoot dice to see who'd get to launch you out the front door. It's admirable that you have a spirit that wants to oppose unnecessary authority, but it'd be interesting to hear from you ANY social situations in which application of authority would be appropriate. As it stands, it seems you'd rather be a part of communities based on perfect liberty than be a member of enjoyable communities. I'm sure you can find an anarchic community that plays mafia. I've never seen an unmoderated site succeed at achieving quality discourse, but if you manage to sustain such a site, I'll be the first to applaud you and sign up.

[Fritzler]

I'm deeply saddened at your attitude.

I'm entirely in agreement with him, and you should be too.

This pronoun is vague. i don't know who you're in agreement with. Are you talking to shea about your agreeement with MBL, or about shea about your agreement with him? :iiam:

ps the video in your link is lame

edit never mind

but i too agree with primpod and mbl

[Primate]

I'm deeply saddened at your attitude.

I'm entirely in agreement with him, and you should be too.

This pronoun is vague. i don't know who you're in agreement with. Are you talking to shea about your agreeement with MBL, or about shea about your agreement with him? :iiam:

ps the video in your link is lame

edit never mind

but i too agree with primpod and mbl

I like it

[Yosarian2]

IF we can get away from bad "bar-party" metaphors, I think the point that Anlx is trying to make is that sites where people start getting banned too quickly, too easily, and where too many people have that power, tend to turn into ugly, hostile, unpleasent places to be, where one silly comment gets someone banned, where his friends all get pissed about that, half of them get banned for flaming that mod, then finally one of the head mods steps in and bans that mod for all the other banning, someone else quits the forum to protect that, and so on and so fourth. I've left several forums in the past because of that kind of annoying and pointless internet drama, and there's no reason for it to happen here.

Frankly, not counting the occasiaonl spammer, I don't think I've ever seen a member of this site do anything on one of the the discussion boards (GD, MD, or site ideas) that I felt deserves a sitewide ban. Are there things one could hypothetically do that would deserve a ban? Sure, and if one of those things were to happen, I think Mith would take care of it. Unless I missed something, though, we seem to just be borrowing trouble we don't need here, and I don't see any reason for the kinds of harsh changes MBL seems to be suggesting here. Things are fine here as they are, aren't they?

[AniX]

If the bar turns into a "Don't get out of your chair unless you are leaving or going to the bathroom. You have a problem with the rules, fuck off. Criticize the management, kiss your ass goodbye" establishment, its not the same bar anymore.

It's amusing that you've changed the proposed set of bar rules here from what I wrote to some innocuous crap no bar would ever have an issue with. Why don't you have the balls to call a spade a spade:

Don't piss, puke or fight in the bar. You have a problem with the rules, we can discuss it. Criticize the management, be prepared to defend your opinions.

Testicles or your implication I lack them aside, I'm ultimately implying that if a moderator army was drafted, what is to stop them from making judgment calls based on, as you put it, the philosophy of "... sorry pal, but what mith and to a lesser extent the majority say, is how it'll go." which will mutate into "If it isn't the same opinion as everyone else, its trolling" for some mods. I'm ultimately worried that anyone who speaks out against the administration is going to get mod-sticked (not by mith, mind you. mith has proven himself to be a relatively just ruler.) I just know that some people, while not trolls or spammers, do have a tendency to ruffle the feathers and question the authorities, and I'm worried Moderator judgment calls in General discussion will ultimately lead to censorship in GD of these quasi-subversive voices.

If you told your local pub that a "NO PISSING IN THE BAR" sign was too authoritarian, the bartenders would probably shoot dice to see who'd get to launch you out the front door. It's admirable that you have a spirit that wants to oppose unnecessary authority, but it'd be interesting to hear from you ANY social situations in which application of authority would be appropriate. As it stands, it seems you'd rather be a part of communities based on perfect liberty than be a member of enjoyable communities. I'm sure you can find an anarchic community that plays mafia. I've never seen an unmoderated site succeed at achieving quality discourse, but if you manage to sustain such a site, I'll be the first to applaud you and sign up.

Up until a couple months ago, mafiascum WAS that site that had both that unmoderated nature to it and the quality discourse. I wish we could go back to that mafiascum, the one I originally managed to find and sign up for. Maybe I'm just like the 'Nam vet who wants to return to the time before the horrors of war, but damn it, I had some good times until shit went down (As far as I can tell, this whole schism in the community really came to the forefront during Stallinggate) and calls for increased moderation went up.

In short, I'd be much more willing to tolerate moderator if some assurances were given that speech with purpose, even a somewhat bizarre or subversive purpose, remain uncontrolled, and that moderation would deal solely with clear spam and flames.

[AniX]

IF we can get away from bad "bar-party" metaphors, I think the point that Anlx is trying to make is that sites where people start getting banned too quickly, too easily, and where too many people have that power, tend to turn into ugly, hostile, unpleasent places to be, where one silly comment gets someone banned, where his friends all get pissed about that, half of them get banned for flaming that mod, then finally one of the head mods steps in and bans that mod for all the other banning, someone else quits the forum to protect that, and so on and so fourth. I've left several forums in the past because of that kind of annoying and pointless internet drama, and there's no reason for it to happen here.

Frankly, not counting the occasiaonl spammer, I don't think I've ever seen a member of this site do anything on one of the the discussion boards (GD, MD, or site ideas) that I felt deserves a sitewide ban. Are there things one could hypothetically do that would deserve a ban? Sure, and if one of those things were to happen, I think Mith would take care of it. Unless I missed something, though, we seem to just be borrowing trouble we don't need here, and I don't see any reason for the kinds of harsh changes MBL seems to be suggesting here. Things are fine here as they are, aren't they?

Someone isn't playing the "make your point more confusing by giving ridiculous metaphors to explain it" game.

I will, however, agree with you whole heartily, even if you are a non-player.

[Primate]

which will mutate into "If it isn't the same opinion as everyone else, its trolling" for some mods.

And why do you think that would happen? (fyi, i partially agree, but selecting some good mods (and we have a big selection) would utterly negate the issue, and it's not hard to get a good mod here).

And there subversive and there's idiotic.

[MrBuddyLee]

Things are fine here as they are, aren't they?

No:

There are lots of nice people here, and mafia's fun, but in the end, it just isn't worth investing time, energy, and emotion into a place where I no longer even

want

to read any of the general or mafia discussion threads and frequently really wish players would just

behave

in games.

I know most of you don't know (or care) who I am, but I'm fairly certain that if I feel this way, so do others. Quality people probably simply aren't signing up in the first place or are leaving (like me) before even gaining IC status.

If you canvassed players from other sites who've come to visit Mafiascum, I'm sure many would characterize us as the Nickelodeon of mafia sites. It's a challenge for new people to realize we're actually the BBC when all the commercials are brought to you by the makers of "Don't Whiz on the Electric Fence".

/metaphor

[DrippingGoofball]

"Don't Whiz on the Electric Fence".

OMG sorry I'm off-topic but that's my favorite cartoon of all time. It is sheer genius. I'm totally obsessed with that episode (Sven Hoek) and "Stimpy's Invention!"

Happy, happy, joy, joy!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=SNqrNIdcPMA

[AniX]

which will mutate into "If it isn't the same opinion as everyone else, its trolling" for some mods.

And why do you think that would happen? (fyi, i partially agree, but selecting some good mods (and we have a big selection) would utterly negate the issue, and it's not hard to get a good mod here).

And there subversive and there's idiotic.

Well, my thinking is like this:

1. Who is going to volunteer?

2. Who is going to be selected from the volunteers?

-Certainly, whomever offers his or herself in service to the forum in the form of moderating is almost definitely going to be someone who takes a more hard line stance on the issue than myself, because otherwise why would they offer their services in removing it. I'm sure some more "hippie" would-be mods will rise up, but I doubt they'll be selected from the group. After all, whats the point making the mod hierarchy if one of them is going to be real lenient.

So already, the mods are going to be made up of people from the stricter side of the tracks, since they are the only people who are driven to defeat the "villains", as it were/are the only people who are going to do the job the way the policy would need to be enforced.

3. What will these mods be doing?

I think this is something, if this plan is to be seriously considered, needs to be spelled out. Are they going to SOLELY delete obvious flames, trollings, and spam? How will they deduce what is spam? I'm sure some of you will respond in the typical "Its common sense.", even though common sense is itself subjective and we are right back to where I started, only instead of mod interpretation of spam, its of mod interpretation of the common sense of what spam is.

How will they identify a flame or trolling? Any post that is an insult or is trying to create trouble? What if its a "flame" of an idea, or of a non-forum member, such as a politician or fictional character? What if its a "flame" in so much as it is an insult to a person, but its a friendly tease rather than one of malice? Will the mod make a judgment call? Should I tell the mod all my friends so they know that if Shea implies that my sexual exploits are nonexistent and that he finds it likely to be due to, in his opinion, my alleged unattractiveness, its cool because I'm his buddy?

I think before we start "/agreeing" it up left, right, up, down, forward, back, and a kind of sideways direction only you jump in the air and spin at the last second resulting in you "/agreeing" in all directions within the span of a few seconds, we need to spell out what and to what extend the mods will be moderating.

[Quagmire]

I know, from plenty of experience with forums and such, that there is an inverse relationship between the heaviness of the moderation of the forum and the awesomeness of the forum.

OH WAIT MY OPINION WON'T MATTER, WILL IT? FUCK, MAN

[Oman]

Ironically, I /agree with Anix on this.

[Mr. Flay]

I think before we start "/agreeing" it up left, right, up, down, forward, back, and a kind of sideways direction only you jump in the air and spin at the last second resulting in you "/agreeing" in all directions within the span of a few seconds, we need to spell out what and to what extend the mods will be moderating.

I agree with AniX on this point. If someone wants to start a new thread with a specific proposal, we could start there, but this discussion is not best suited to coming to consensus on anything.

[IH]

I would be entirely against this btw, as I feel we would turn into MTGS.

[/late]

[ShadowLurker]

STOP BUMPING UP DEAD TOPICS YOU TROLL

[IH]

How do you bump a sticky?

[Thestatusquo]

Its more of a grind than a bump.

[mith]

Just posting to say that I haven't been ignoring this (or any of the related threads). Though, that should be obvious from the stickying. I wanted to let this whole thing simmer for a bit, rather than acting on my immediate feeling on the matter.

Something will be done, though. I'm not sure what. As AniX said at the top of this page, I'm a "laissez-faire" sort of guy, and outside of actual games I don't like having a bunch of rules, much less having to play nanny for the forum. But when the levels of trolling, assholishness, and utter stupidity have reached levels that make

me

cringe... yeah.

Anyway, more soon, when I've considered the options.

[nonny]

amen thesp...well put.

[Aisar]

That was a really good BZZZZZZZZZT post and I think we can learn alot BZZZZZZZZZT from things like this.


BZZZZZZZZZT

[Aisar]

That was a really good BZZZZZZZZZT post and I think we can learn alot BZZZZZZZZZT from things like this.


BZZZZZZZZZT

Sorry about that I kept on pressing CTRL - V by accident how do I edit again?

[AniX]

But everyone needs a gimmick, kid, and you just created yours.

What were you doing that required you to copy/paste bee sounds somewhere else?