The rules....and other stuff

[Caleb956 451]

1 hour ago, YeEternalTuna said:

P.S.S. Can you PLEASE fix the ''Dont argue with staff'' rule because staff are using it to shut out people when they're in the wrong and they just make up excuses every single time they're called out for something wrong that they did because apparently criticism is now arguing with someone

This shouldn't be happening in the first place, if there are staff using the "don't argue with staff" just to silence people even when they are in the wrong, then that should be brought up in one way or another to the higherups and we'll see what we can do.

 

1 hour ago, YeEternalTuna said:

P.S. Please make sure your staff actually read the rules before they try enforcing anything because from what i've seen the older staff just snowball a non-existing rule(s) into the new staff and it just gets out of control 

Basically what I said above, however, if there are staff enforcing rules that don't actually exist, then by all means try to push them in the right direction and explain to them that it's not a rule or whatnot.  Otherwise refer back to what I already said about if they use the "don't argue with staff" thing.

 

8 minutes ago, NitNat said:

when I answered a question to a surf friend today in a slightly higher pitch than my normal voice in one sentence.  I didn't have the intent behind to annoy anyone with it but as a little burst of humor to lighten to mood of the surf in general, but seeing how up in the air the current "rule" of that is, it creates a no fun allowed feeling in the servers. 

This is something I want to point out for sake of discussion, like has been stated before in previous threads, all staff handle things differently, its just how it goes.  We can always try to clarify the rules as much as we want to, but there will ALWAYS be some sort of discrepancy, whether it be very much so or very little.  Now me personally, I don't have a problem with how people talk unless its A. Clearly a voicechanger, or B. It's upsetting other people on the server.

 

On the topic of clarifying rules, like others already said, we are looking at a couple different points of interest to try and make as clear as possible, but we always appreciate feedback so we can see what the community wants to happen with the servers and the rules (such as cutting down rules so its not such a read, or instead making a list of things as examples).

[LAN_Megalodon 195]

35 minutes ago, NitNat said:

You're just restating what's already been mentioned by someone else.  The "exaggerated voice" on servers is clearly not to irritate someone.  I've seen a few examples of it being for humor that should've annoy anyone in the first place.  I was even told today "no immature voice allowed" when I answered a question to a surf friend today in a slightly higher pitch than my normal voice in one sentence.  I didn't have the intent behind to annoy anyone with it but as a little burst of humor to lighten to mood of the surf in general, but seeing how up in the air the current "rule" of that is, it creates a no fun allowed feeling in the servers.

If you're having that kind of problem, collect evidence and create abuse reports. It doesn't matter if we write 350+ words on two golden tablets about a certain rule, issues with interpretation are always going to occur because words cannot completely explain intention in full. 

Personally I find the rule useful because we do have those cavemen who come on and try to do their best impression of Peter from family guy or whatever else for two hours straight.

Rules are generally enforced through precedence, so if you are having problems with staff picking on you for having a small bit of fun, make reports and bring attention to your issue, but generally there's always going to be some amount of subjective interpretation involved with rule enforcement regardless of how well it's worded. In fact I'd argue the more wordy and lengthier the more likely players just skip reading it, which doesn't solve anything.

Edited July 1, 2018 by LAN_Megalodon
2x whoops (see edit history)

[YeEternalTuna 246]

3 minutes ago, LAN_Megalodon said:

If you're having that kind of problem, collect evidence and create abuse reports. It doesn't matter if we write 350+ words on two golden tablets about a certain rule, issues with interpretation are always going to occur because words cannot completely explain intention in full. 

Personally I find the rule useful because we do have those cavemen who come on and try to do their best impression of Peter from family guy or whatever else for two hours straight.

Rules are generally enforced through precedence, so if you are having problems with staff picking on you for having a small bit of fun, make reports and bring attention to your issue, but generally there's always going to be some amount of subjective interpretation involved with rule enforcement regardless of how well it's worded. In fact I'd argue the more wordy and lengthier the more likely players just skip reading it, which doesn't solve anything.

I mean what's the point of bringing up to the higher ups when one of them were on at the time. That was the last straw because a certain staff member had called him on just to say that I was wrong and that this invisible rule exists. Also funny enough, yesterday night I had been jokingly talking about toes in a weird voice and nutty had NO problem with it but then when another staff member cries to him about it, THEN it becomes a problem? 

That's crazy my guy

[Kypari 579]

45 minutes ago, YeEternalTuna said:

I mean what's the point of bringing up to the higher ups when one of them were on at the time. That was the last straw because a certain staff member had called him on just to say that I was wrong and that this invisible rule exists. Also funny enough, yesterday night I had been jokingly talking about toes in a weird voice and nutty had NO problem with it but then when another staff member cries to him about it, THEN it becomes a problem? 

That's crazy my guy

@mrnutty12

[Precious 80]

The "no inappropriate voices" rule has always been weird to me. While I don't believe it should be entirely removed, I think it should be more clarified what counts as inappropriate. If someone is talking in a way that they know is annoying or harassing others, similar to the situation Lan brought up, then I think that should count as harassment or trolling. But if someone talks in a slightly higher pitched voice or fake accent just to tell a harmless joke, then I don't see any problem with using silly voices, as long as you aren't using them all the time or to annoy others. 

As of right now, this rule is so weird to enforce, and I've seen several staff members enforce it differently, or not at all. This isn't the first time confusion has broken out among staff due to vague rules. I think everyone could benefit if a couple of people took the time to give the rules a one-over to add some more detail and clarify some things. Just my opinion though. 

As for the "don't argue with staff" thing, I agree to an extent that staff members shouldn't say that. At times, there will be legitimate arguments you may want to bring up with staff, and that's fine. However, it's important to remember that's what the forums are for. If you feel like you have a serious topic that you want to bring up to the community (like this one for example) then this is the best place to talk about it. The servers themselves aren't exactly the best place to talk about them, because people are trying to hang out and talk/trade, and discussing serious topics like that can be disruptive. I'm not saying you should never question a staff member's judgement in game, but if you just start arguing with them and they continuously tell you to stop and you persist, that's when I believe 'don't argue with staff' is a valid thing to say. A perfect example to me of a good time to use this phrase is when someone comes on the server with a racial slur in their name and keeps arguing with staff about 'muh free speech!' 

However, I do believe there have been a few cases where a staff member says "don't argue with staff!" just to shut down someone they don't like or disagree with, and I believe that is an abuse of power. If you see a staff member saying something like that to silence people just because they don't like them/don't want to address a serious concern, then I would encourage you to make an abuse thread or talk to a higher up about it. I'm sure they'll be able to help you out. 

Again, this is all just my opinion, you're free to disagree with any or all of it.

[YeEternalTuna 246]

@Everyone Just to clarify again the immature voice rule isnt in the surf motd so that means it shouldnt be enforced on the surf. Also when I talked about the ''dont argue with staff rule'' I mean whenever I would tell a staff member that they're wrong they would always shield themselves with ''dont argue with staff'' rule and the ''staff have final say'' rule and point me towards the forums essentially showing that they can't admit that they're wrong imo, which is why I had to make this thread...

[Kypari 579]

28 minutes ago, YeEternalTuna said:

@Everyone Just to clarify again the immature voice rule isnt in the surf motd so that means it shouldnt be enforced on the surf. Also when I talked about the ''dont argue with staff rule'' I mean whenever I would tell a staff member that they're wrong they would always shield themselves with ''dont argue with staff'' rule and the ''staff have final say'' rule and point me towards the forums essentially showing that they can't admit that they're wrong imo, which is why I had to make this thread...

It has now been added, though the rule should have still been enforced on surf before it had been added by virr today, even if it wasn't consistent with the other servers by mistake.

[mrnutty12 184]

1 hour ago, YeEternalTuna said:

I mean what's the point of bringing up to the higher ups when one of them were on at the time. That was the last straw because a certain staff member had called him on just to say that I was wrong and that this invisible rule exists. Also funny enough, yesterday night I had been jokingly talking about toes in a weird voice and nutty had NO problem with it but then when another staff member cries to him about it, THEN it becomes a problem? 

That's crazy my guy

I mean, unless there is someone being obviously extremely annoying on mic by constantly doing some dumb voice/impression that nobody asked for or likes, I usually just let people doing a funny little voice thing for a joke or something finish their bit and go on with life. Fewer people get muted, you don't make a scene over it, and you might just have a laugh along the way.

Though when people start complaining about someone doing a funny voice is about when I take action because at that point because it is disruptive enough for people to say something.  Obviously different staff may feel different things qualify for an immature voice which is what led to that particular event, but I hardly find it that crazy that different people think different things would be past the line of a harmless joke. 

For the record, nobody asked me to come to deal with anything in that particular case, I do join the servers of my own accord sometimes you know. You just happened to be there at the time.

[SyrixCoffeeWolf 12]

I can definitely support the idea of making a lot of the rules more consistent and clear as far as definition goes. I'm not a huge fan of the whole "staff discretion" thing either. We should have rules with as little room for alternate interpretation as possible. Some rule interpretation difference is inevitable, but we should still be doing everything we can to limit how many rules we have like that for the sake of consistency.

 

I know some people don't like the no silly voices rule, but, personally, I don't want to see it change all that much. I like it when people use voice chat for actually talking with others and not doing impressions. There are some exceptions to this I could make depending on how intense the silly voice is but all-in-all, I say no.

 

Lastly, I do think there is ultimately a reason why we have that no arguing with staff rule. If you care that deeply about a certain topic or another then the forums would probably be the best place to take it or to get into contact with a higherup. That being said, it should not be being used to silence every single debate on the servers.

[Tatost 604]

6 minutes ago, DiaperHyperWolf said:

I know some people don't like the no silly voices rule, but, personally, I don't want to see it change all that much. I like it when people use voice chat for actually talking with others and not doing impressions. There are some exceptions to this I could make depending on how intense the silly voice is but all-in-all, I say no.

I think the problem with the voice rule is similar to that of the rule against sexually explicit decals. Staff just has their own opinions on where the line should be drawn.

You also said you're not a fan of "staff discretion," and I completely agree. Giving the staff the ability to be super chill or strict depending on their mood is not a good idea.

[SyrixCoffeeWolf 12]

7 minutes ago, Tatost said:

I think the problem with the voice rule is similar to that of the rule against sexually explicit decals. Staff just has their own opinions on where the line should be drawn.

In my view, I think it's pretty clear what is and isn't allowed. Basically it's using anything other than your normal speaking voice. I might like to be able to allow more minor voices or impressions, but like I said, for the most part, I think it's good the way it is.

[YeEternalTuna 246]

16 minutes ago, mrnutty12 said:

For the record, nobody asked me to come to deal with anything in that particular case, I do join the servers of my own accord sometimes you know. You just happened to be there at the time.

oof sorry for assuming that but it's that the certain staff member had said they had asked you about the whole rule thing and you got on as they said that. Also can you guys elaborate in the motd what you mean by no immature voices? Just so that its not as vague as it was before.

[Tatost 604]

15 minutes ago, DiaperHyperWolf said:

In my view, I think it's pretty clear what is and isn't allowed. Basically it's using anything other than your normal speaking voice. I might like to be able to allow more minor voices or impressions, but like I said, for the most part, I think it's good the way it is.

I think the key words here are "in my view," which indicates you are going to state your opinion. Instead of people saying "in my view," regarding rules, I'd like it to turn into "in the community's view..." I hope you know where I'm coming from.

[SyrixCoffeeWolf 12]

2 minutes ago, Tatost said:

I think the key words here are "in my view," which indicates you are going to state your opinion. Instead of people saying "in my view," regarding rules, I'd like it to turn into "in the community's view..." I hope you know where I'm coming from.

Well, my view is based on how I've seen others enforce it as well. Also while going with the community is nice in several cases, I do feel that there are some things that are best decided on by staff and staff alone.

[QueenOfHearts 61]

Staff discretion is iffy and having unclear rules leads to this circle of people claiming mod abuse and mods claiming rule breaking. By having set easy to understand rules, with a few mod discretion rules (Trolling, harassment to an extent) It will help rule breakers know which rule they broke and mods/admins know which rule they enforced. The way it is now I check MOTD before anything because otherwise you get into an issue of them saying you are wrong as they interpreted it different leading them to claim abuse.

Rewording is definitely necessary and I would love to help with that if asked