When the thread I created to discuss site policies with regards to staff member behavior finally starts to have an actual discussion between the members of this community, it gets locked.
Are you serious?
Lots of new points were being raised, and people were actually discussing things. Now you have forcefully stopped them from being able to express their opinions in the proper context. You have stopped me from being able to respond in the proper context.
At the very least I would have liked to apologize to adelikat for jumping to conclusions and mischaracterizing him, but now you have stopped me from doing so. (I apologize here for it, but I would have liked to do it in more detail, actually responding to what he wrote.)
Nobody was out of line. There is no reason to lock that thread. Locking it only gives a negative picture of the moderators.
Please unlock it.
The thread feels weird because you seem to be implying that disrespect is an actual site policy
I didn't mean it like that. My main issue is about how my complaint was handled by the administration. The complaint was dismissed on the grounds that the staff member in question was not doing staff duty in our PM conversation. This implies a certain policy (given that it comes from the primary administrator who, for all I know, is the person with the most authority in terms of site management.) I disagree with that implied policy (and I explained in my original post why.) I don't think that what staff members do within the site should be simply ignored and shoved aside, because they represent the site, even if they are not "doing staff duty".
when the reality is that you may or may not have had one isolated incident with one member of the team
Yes, it was an isolated incident with one single staff member. My intent was not to imply that all staff members are like that. The major problem I am having with this is what I explained above.
but since you refuse to disrespect their privacy by not posting salient information then we'll never know what actually happened. I think you might have misinterpreted the mod's intentions. I seriously doubt anyone on the team would just PM you insults unprompted.
I described in another post what happened: I sent this staff member a PM making a request about a conversation thread. His response was very hostile and contained swearwords and insults (such as "f**ing" and "idiot"). My message did not contain any insults nor any such hostility.
As said, the actual topic of the conversation is not what I'm having the problem with. It's that hostile attitude and insults, and especially the fact that they were completely dismissed by the site management.
There could be some further context to this. Maybe it was prompted by your behavior in a public thread? Even you admit you're problematic of a poster at times, it wouldn't be unlikely.
It was prompted by a public thread, but the insults were uncalled for. I did not insult him, nor ask for anything unreasonable.
But again, I'm not so much bothered by the insults themselves (if anybody, I know what it is to lose one's temper and say nasty things), but the subsequent attitude both from him (continual of hostile attitude) and the primary administrator (pretty much shrugging the whole thing, and then ignoring my subsequent message.)
This isn't an issue of site policy being wrong, this is an isolated incident, someone acting on their own in one particular case. We're not all like this all the time. Your problem is with the person you were supposedly PMing. It's not the forum's problem with the entire staff, which is what you seem to want it to be.
The site policy may be silent about the behavior of staff members when they are not "on duty" (even if they are acting within the site), but I think that shouldn't be so, and is precisely why I made this thread. I think the position should come with even a modicum of responsibility.
I'm not asking for staff members to treat every visitor like they were kings. Just a minimum amount of respect and diplomacy. And for complaints to likewise be treated with a bit more diplomacy (even a simple apology and something like "I will talk to him" would have sufficed.)
For example, there's your comment to me from July, that I brought up earlier in the thread:
Warp wrote:
Congratulations Samsara, you turned a thread made in remembrance of a great person into a pile of trash by acting like a complete asshole. I hope you are happy about yourself and your perceived higher moral ground.
This is something you said, Warp. This is something you said to me in a thread where I was trying to stay reasonable and respectful toward you the entire time while letting you know that you, yourself were doing something disrespectful, something that could have put off a lot of people. And then you turn it around on me, as if I were the problem all along for trying to keep things on-topic and respectful. That's something you did, and yet you claim you're not the one disrespecting anyone.
Because you are being reasonable and actually having a conversation, I really respect that.
I regret having said that to you. It was wrong, and I apologize for it. I still do not fully agree with what you said in that thread, but my response was completely inappropriate, and could have been worded much, much more respectfully.
I sometimes let my feelings overcome my rationale, and say things in the heat of the moment, but that's not an excuse.
In other words, yes, there might have been improper treatment.
Thank you for acknowledging that. And I am saying that completely honestly and sincerely; this isn't sarcasm or anything like that.
I did not acknowledge anything. I stated that possibility exists, as abstractly as possible.
Ignorance is slavery. You're not going to change or improve, the thread is pointless.
For a moment I honestly thought that you were willing to have an actual conversation.
I am willing to agree with you --in general-- that when you approach someone, they shouldn't respond with insults. --In general.--
Thank you. That's all I'm asking.
In the situation you are describing, let me just be absolutely clear that I have the chain of events down:
Yes, that is about what happened. Although:
5) You continued to complain to the original primary administrator, who has dismissed you previously, in what you call "formal and polite", and that person has ignored you.
My subsequent message to him was not as much as a complaint, but a plea to continue the conversation in private. I argued why I think a certain degree of diplomacy ought to be expected from site staff when they are acting within the site (even if they aren't "on duty"), in a very similar manner as I did in my original post, and that I don't think it's an unreasonable request that this would be more official policy.
I believe that he did read my message (because, AFAIK, messages get moved from the "outbox" to the "sent box" when the recipient reads them), and I waited for many days for a response.
Given this, and the fact that in his last message he expressly said he preferred a public discussion, I decided to do that.
6) Again, you return to asking for professionalism and diplomacy, but you seem to be ignoring the professionalism and diplomacy you are receiving in this very thread by site moderators and staff, while trying to figure out how to start handling your very real and important issue.
I don't understand why you think that. Some of the responses have been quite dismissive (and with a clear tone of "you deserve that kind of treatment"). Others are asking me to reveal the person in question and the contents of the original conversation (which I don't think is quite relevant, because my complaint was not about his opinions, but about his insults and hostile behavior.)
As has been asked several times above, and immediately above by Mothrayas specifically, please give us something to start with, instead of continuing this thread with vague hintings at details.
I honestly don't think it's necessary to start revealing the contents of private conversations, or who the person was. The list of my main points which you described above was pretty much it.
I'm not asking for this particular instance to have consequences. I'm just asking for a general revision of site policy with regards to this kind of thing in general.
In other words, yes, there might have been improper treatment.
Thank you for acknowledging that. And I am saying that completely honestly and sincerely; this isn't sarcasm or anything like that.
But when the entire grounds for it are completely ignored, this becomes talking to one's reflection in the mirror, where every absurd one says is being agreed upon by all means. I call that ignorance and keep thinking that ignorance is slavery.
I know I have not always behaved in the best possible ways. Do I deserve a cold shoulder from some people here (including many staff members) for my past behavior? Probably.
But I really think that a line is crossed when that "cold shoulder" becomes outright hostile behavior and insults. I really think that some standards of behavior ought to be expected from site staff, even when dealing with a person they might not like.
To write what? That people who behave poorly might not receive the nicest responses from site staff? I thought that was implied in any community.
I have to disagree with that. If someone sends a private message to a staff member, it is not appropriate for that staff member to throw insults back, especially when the original message had no such things. It doesn't matter who the person is who sent the message. This is basic diplomacy.
If the primary administrator is sent a formal complaint about a staff member, dismissing it with "he wasn't doing staff duty" and then leaking it to the member in question (who then proceeds to send a somewhat mocking message about it to me), and then ignoring further messages (which were completely formal and polite) is not appropriate behavior, no matter who the complainant is.
Why is it so unreasonable to ask for a bit more of diplomacy and professionalism from high-ranking staff members?
Hey Warp post what the private conversation was about, and stop ignoring like 10 people saying you need to reveal exactly what was said.
If he wants to post the conversation in public, he can do so. I am not trying to attack him. If he wants to remain anonymous, I will fully respect that. I think I made it quite clear in my original post what exactly my problem is.
Warp, if you want any meaningful discussion out of this, you need to disclose what your complaint was.
I think I described my complaint quite clearly in my original post.
And as I said there, I really just wanted to discuss this with the primary administrator in private, and I clearly told him several times so. I suggested that I could make a public thread about it, but would prefer to discuss it in private, and he said he'd prefer the public discussion, and my subsequent message to him explaining why I would really prefer a private conversation was ignored. (As I mentioned earlier, my messages to him were extremely formal and polite. I don't think they deserved to be ignored.)
He can defend is actions, and those of that staff member in question, if he wants to.
The actual complaint I'm making in this thread is still unaddressed. Most of the responses have been, essentially, defending the hostile behavior and insults, and the improper handling of formal complaints, if the person being insulted is unlikeable.
feos wrote:
PS: I wonder how many people think derailing a thread to the point of locking it is fine.
Is this official policy? If someone "derails threads to the point of being locked", then that person is free to be insulted by staff members, and his formal complaints to the primary administrator ignored?
You seem to be missing the point.
So let me ask once again: Should it be acceptable for staff members, when acting within the site, to be hostile towards visitors and insult them? Is it ok for the primary administrator to mishandle and dismiss formal complaints about staff members, and to just outright ignore such formal messages sent to him?
Would you be willing to write that explicitly into the site rules? If not, then perhaps a revision in attitudes ought to be in place. Especially since tasvideos.org is a relatively reputable and well-known site.
Once again: A bit of diplomacy never hurt anybody. I don't think what I'm asking is unreasonable.
especially when the insults were quite uncalled for.
Define insults uncalled for, and also give examples of insults called for. I'm very interested.
If I had sent him a private message with insults and verbal attacks, I would have been more understanding of being responded in kind. I would not have even issued the complaint. However, I did not do that.
The disagreement we previously had, and what I asked in the private message, was not deserving of being outright insulted. It was quite inappropriate behavior.
But, once again, it's not the only thing I have a problem with here. My major problem is how my formal complaint was handled, and what the attitude of the site towards this kind of behavior is. Even if the insults had been just responding in kind, my complaint to the primary administrator should still have been taken with more seriousness and professionalism.
Again, while providing as little detail as possible, this seems more like a one-sided airing of frustration (and vaguebooking) and not hoping for actual discussion.
My intent is seriously not to try to mar or attack said staff member (which is why I haven't even mentioned who he is.) My complaint is about site policies and attitudes.
So Warp, to wrap up my thoughts on this matter, I just want to say that I've got no hard feelings toward you, but I do believe that you need to take an objective look at your own behavior.
I'm not saying I have always acted in an impeccable manner. But my past behavior on the forum should not be an excuse for the primary administrator to handle a formal complaint poorly, for my (very formal and polite) messages to him being ignored, or for staff members insulting people being just accepted, no matter who the person being insulted may be, especially when the insults were quite uncalled for.
Once again, I don't think that what I'm asking is in any way unreasonable: A bit of diplomacy and professionalism from site staff.
Well the problem here is that we don't know the context of the argument. So this discussion is a bit pointless unless we know about it, which we don't.
I'm not saying forum moderation should not be taken seriously, but the CONTEXT of the rudeness is pretty key.
I sent him a private message, and he responded with insults and a very hostile attitude. I did not insult him. I just asked him for something reasonable. His insults were completely uncalled for.
But that doesn't matter, and it isn't the point of my post. My point is that the primary administrator handled my formal complaint inappropriately. My point is also that allowing high-ranking staff members to engage in insults and hostile behavior against visitors when acting within the site as long as they are not "doing staff duty" should not be an official policy.
I know that some staff members hate me. That makes zero difference. Insults and hostility, no matter what the context, are inappropriate. In this particular case, in addition, it was completely uncalled for; it's not like he was just responding to my insults to him, because I did not insult or attack him.
I have attempted to discuss this in private with the primary administrator, but the only responses I got were a dismissal, and a suggestion to discuss it in public, even though I would have really wanted to discuss it in private.
Some time ago I sent the primary administrator a complaint about a staff member insulting me and being quite hostile towards me. I do not think this is appropriate behavior, especially from a higher-ranking staff member. It doesn't matter whether he was performing any staff duties in that conversation or not. (More on that below.)
I think my complaint was handled quite inappropriately. Not only was it completely dismissed with a short reply, what is worse, behind the scenes the primary administrator then either forwarded it or told in detail about it to this staff member, who then proceeded to send me a somewhat hostile, if not even mocking, remark about it (with enough detail to make it clear that he either had read it, or told in detail about it.) I was not informed of this by the primary administrator.
My subsequent attempt at discussing this in private has been ignored, with no responses whatsoever. Which, once again, I find quite inappropriate, especially from the primary administrator.
I don't think what I'm asking is unreasonable, especially for a site that's relatively as big, reputable and known as this one:
- A bit more of diplomacy and professionalism from staff members, when they are acting within the website.
- Formal complaints sent to the primary administrator to be taken a bit more seriously and with professionalism.
- Such formal complaints, sent in private, to be handled with a reasonable degree of confidentiality.
- The complainant's messages not being blatantly ignored.
As for the question of whether a staff member should be allowed to insult people and be hostile towards them, even when they are not doing "staff duty", I would posit that they should not.
By accepting the role of a staff member, especially a higher-ranking one, you are taking a responsibility to represent the site, and work towards benefiting it and not mar its reputation. It makes little difference whether you are doing "staff duty" or not, the mere fact that you are a staff member means that your actions within the site reflect the attitudes of the site.
Assume that you went into a restaurant, and a waiter were really rude and hostile towards you. This would obviously give you a rather bad image of said restaurant. Now suppose you make a complaint about that waiter to the restaurant's manager. If the manager just answered with "he was on a break, he wasn't representing the restaurant", that would not actually help at all. In fact, on the contrary: It would give an even worse image of the restaurant, as even the managers don't care what their employees are doing within the premises of the restaurant, if they are "on a break".
Sure, on a website it may not as bad as that. However, I still posit that the mere fact of someone being a staff member bestows a duty of representing said site when acting within it. A bit of diplomacy never hurt anybody.
It's hard to compare submission amounts in 2004 compared to 2015.
While some people did indeed a lot of commendable work back then, the TASing world was rather different back in those days. There weren't but just a handful of TASes published, and plenty of unTASed games for the NES (and a bit later to other platforms), so you had a lot to choose from, and almost no competition. Standards and rules of admission were not as developed back then as they are now. While some principles remain, it can arguably be quite different (something that was accepted then might well not be accepted today. Although to be fair, also vice-versa.) Tools were also a lot different back then.
It's easy to look at the raw numbers, but the circumstances were a bit different. (Again, not to undervalue anybody's effort and work. I'm just trying to be pragmatic.)
Originally (as far as I know) the number e (ie. 2.71828...) came up in compound interest calculations.
For example, if you have 1 dollar, and a compound interest of 100% per year, and the interest is continuously calculated, after one year you'll have exactly e dollars.
The generic formula for this is (1+1/n)n, where n is the amount of times compound interest is calculated during the year. As n approaches infinity (which means it's continuously calculated), that formula approaches e.
Is the fact that ex is its own derivative just a coincidence, or is there a correlation with the above?
Good to know that I bring rays of sunshine into your life, Warp :)
Let me put it like this:
Do you believe that the holocaust happened?
If I'm guessing correctly, you do. However, if you search around the internet, you will find a thousand times more "evidence" and "research" that it didn't happen, than you will find evidence of giants.
Yet, regardless of this, I'm assuming you still will believe that the holocaust happened. You will be critical and skeptical of all that "research" of the contrary.
But why is that? Why are you more critical of one extraordinary claim than another? Why do you put one claim under much stricter standards of evidence than the other? Why do you consider one to be more plausible than the other (even though the thing that you consider less plausible has a lot more material out there)?
Why don't you apply the same strong criticism and skepticism to all extraordinary claims?
Think about your own biases about these subjects, and why you have them.
Otherwise, I now know that something can be absolutely impossible ever no matter what, and still be called science and healthy skepticism.
I said "pretty much". Nothing can be claimed with 100% certainty. However, after a certain amount of evidence it becomes quite trustworthy, and doesn't make much sense to think otherwise.
And conditions on Earth has always been the same, am I right again?
Pretty much for the duration of what can be called humans. (Of course there have been a few glacial periods here and there during that time, but nothing that would require a significantly different biology to survive.)
And yes, I know the reverse-scientific (iow. "here's the conclusion; what evidence can we find to support it?") claims made by young earth creationists. They don't hold up to scrutiny.
Either way, a radically different environment is not somehow a magical answer to human biology surviving extremes. A radically different environment would require a radically different biology.
Tolerating irrationality, superstition, hoaxes and conspiracy theories simply to not hurt feelings is not something I strive for, sorry.
Am I right that you consider existence of giants absolutely not possible ever no matter what?
If we are talking about human giants, then pretty much. We know enough about biology to be pretty certain that it's impossible for the human physiology to survive after a certain size.
(Incidentally, the same is true if we go to the other extreme.)
Warp, stop posting in the topic if you don't like it.
No, because misinformation should never go unchallenged. If we keep silent about misinformation, it will spread to those who are not seeing the critique.
The best way to combat irrationality is with knowledge.
Warp,
don't you have anything more productive to do with your life than write agressive statements about what another person should or not look up for information or do with their free time?
I consider it quite productive to inspire people into healthy skepticism, rationality and science, away from superstition, fairytales, hoaxes and conspiracy theories. Into understanding how the world really works, how science works, and to recognize deductive and argumentative fallacies.
So if even one person becomes intellectually better because of what I have written, I would be very happy.
Tolerating irrationality, superstition, hoaxes and conspiracy theories simply to not hurt feelings is not something I strive for, sorry.
