I want to go over some aspects of ECC chat rules and the way they've been enforced over the past year. I don't really care whether anything actually gets done or not, I just wanted to start conversation about things we don't normally get to talk about. Firstly, "touchy subjects", topics usually concerning politics, religion, and controversial issues. There's an obvious reason why these aren't to be discussed. Topics of this type can be downright offensive. I have no objection to making sure the chat is clear of this type of argument. But many times I find that legitimate and proper discussion is quickly shut down, for no other apparent reason than the possibility of a flame war happening. I really wish that our concern was with the flame wars, not the conversations that just may lead to them. Another thing I've previously taken issue with is the treatment of conversation of the current happenings of minecraft, and our server exclusively. Especially when the mods are uncertain of what's going on, conversation about it seems to be met with swift action in the form of warnings, kicks, and potentially bans. The best reason I've received for this type of behavior is that such conversations lead to unwanted rumors, but this seems eerily authoritarian to me. I also think that forcing people to stop talking about something happening within their own server makes it seem much worse than it is. If anything, refusing to speak of it, and silencing anyone that does creates more suspicion than a petty rumor could ever hope to achieve. Banned Users. This has a lot to in common with the paragraph above. We've had some controversial bans in the past, and it's clear that repeated criticizing of the staff team for a certain ban should not be allowed. However, I hardly see a reason for making average, run of the mill bans seem secretive by quickly hushing anyone who speaks about them. Just give them the ban reason, and everyone would go on being a lot happier and less suspicious than they are. Once again, it seems like average conduct regarding these sorts of issues creates so many more rumors than if we were open about it. Well that's all, tell me what you think.
I agree. This silencing of users and what's happening is comparable to a dictatorship. The fact that the first user to ever join ECC is banned is NOT small news people. Something big happened here and the community has a right to know what it is.
When we censor discussions in chat we do so for a variety of reasons. It is important to have some faith in the staff team at this time. We are trying our best to prevent another drama-filled hurricane from destabilizing our recovering community. The people who received bans were banned for legitimate reasons after being given multiple warnings, even if you are lead to believe otherwise. Of course some crimes are severe and do not require a warning before bans, but these kind of cases are in the minority. I ask that you to trust your staff team, we are composed of dedicated ECC users, just like you, who only want the best for ECC.
The way to recover a community is not by taking a bunch of huge figures in it, banning them, and then making people act like they never existed. This is not the best for ECC, and if even saying their name gets me warned, I don't understand how you can avoid drama. This only makes people more angry, only increases drama.
That case in global today was an extreme situation. We were trying to prevent the spread of unjustified rumors. We were trying to prevent another dramatic event from unfolding. Last time this happened we observed how actual facts could be mutated into unrecognizable lies after only a short amount of time in circulation. It is not worth allowing people to speculate about things that they do not wholly understand. That only leads to mutations of the original case, leading to rumors that are more relatable with utter lies. And, these lies are very dangerous... they can tear communities apart. This kind of goes without saying, but those important figures were banned for good reason. Being a huge figure does not allow you to break rules, plot against the server, troll staff, or insult the owner without consequence.
But it does not mean we can just make them disappear because of one happening, they should be remembered for the good things they had done. It's not as if for the past 3 years ike did awful things- no, he was a huge part of the community. And now nobody will be able to think, nobody will able to talk about 3 years because of this awful rule. If you want to heal a distraught community, just say this person was banned because of this, and that. Complaints are public, yet when people are confused we get nothing? Do you know how many problems just saying the root problem can solve?
I would entertain a discussion about the rule, but the important thing to note here is that in chat today our primary objective was to prevent the spread of drama. I don't think anyone is willing to argue that if we allowed discussion of these banned users, under the circumstances we were experiencing today, then we would have promoted positive, not rumor starting, discussions about our server's past. More than likely, we would have promoted negative discussions that would have only spread unnecessary, and unjustified, rumors.
I would like to hear discussions about how to move forward. I personally do not have a problem with discussions about users who are banned, but I am uncompromising on my position that talking about the nature of bans is problematic and rightfully illegal. (not the formal position of the staff, but my personal opinion)
That isn't what I meant. As I quote from you "That case in global today was an extreme situation" I am talking about that. What happened there?
Some users got a little rowdy. One thing lead to another, ultimately leading to the staff having to take stern action. It had to do with discussions about banned users and speculation into the nature of their bans. Now, I would like to move onward from here. There is no sense in dwelling in the past.
There is no way in a situation like this you can avoid drama and rumors, however as a member of the community I feel as though giving us information, even though people will be upset and may start other negative things, will go a long way. For instance, some people know why he is banned, and I'm sure after a while everyone will know. This only breaks down the bond between player and staff. I feel like we can't trust you anymore.
Well, there are good arguments about player privacy rights that come into play here. We would need to determine whether ban reasons are considered private information only to be shared between the staff and the banned user. I don't know the answer to this, but I would be interested in hearing arguments. I agree with you that some transparency would go a long way, but there are issues that need reconciled before any decisions can be made.
Well onto my opinion about this suggestion. I think some of these discussions about banned players and touchy subjects should be allowed to a certain extent, however if these discussions get out of hand I think the staff should step in and take action. Edit: As an example I think ban reasons should be public information, but people can not start fighting with staff over these bans.
Complaints are public. Most of the time when a bunch of people are banned, there is a thread explaining why. How is this different? I'm not going to say because ike was "popular" he shouldn't be banned, however I think it should mean something. It should mean something enough that the staff can publicly announce and be confident that the ban is justified. He dedicated 3 years to this server, and has inspired so many people. We deserve something on it, he was a big piece to everyone. I'm tired of being told to "move on" when he played such a giant role and whenever I try to connect to the community about it I'm shut out. Communities heal together, over time. Not by being shut down by those who we are supposed to trust, and respect, and be told to "Move on" 2 hours later. He deserves more than that. And you know it.
I agree that we need to modulate what we censor, but there needs to be a framework to describe how this modulation could be done. Before change is possible, we, as a community, need to start thinking about a plan that balances all the concerns. We can't just abruptly change things without knowing exactly what to change. So, lets try to work out a plan that addresses all the concerns about these rules while also promoting more transparency between the staff and the community. Once we can come up with a framework, we can more formally suggest a rule change. So, I implore you all to start thinking of solutions. You guys have to promote positive change through civil discussion and suggestions, these issues are real and we need to address them as a community. I don't have all the answers. But, I am sure if everyone were to start thinking, then we could come up with solutions to the majority of our problems.
@Mendiboi I would like to point out that ike was never warned. He said one thing and got banned forever. Let me now compare this to other users, who have been temp-banned countless times, are a troll, and have a bad history, yet are still warned. On the flipside, we have an old, dare I say "famous" user who has but one small black mark on his four year history (that was over three years ago, may I point out) and isn't warned. Do not respond to this with paragraphs of fancy words that don't actually answer the questions, give me an answer.
