Discussion about forum moderation

[insert_anagram_here]

7 minutes ago, Calderis said:

I'm sorry if it feels personal but it's not

Nono it doesn't feel personal at all actually. You do the same thing to every single person. I never said I was targeted. But you do seem to do it even on threads that do not even need a WOB, for example, this one. Like, right now.

The fact that you get so defensive though when people point this thing out to both of you is very strange. To be honest, it's not very hospitable, at all actually, especially to someone that has no idea what your title even means, but by all means if you think this is constructive, I'm not going to silence you. Personally I would like for people to learn how to provide evidence to their arguments, how to make logical connections to their arguments but hey I don't have a title for my opinion to gain any added value. 

And I will not further comment on this matter because I feel it's derailing the discussion. Feel free to PM me if you like.

Edited February 24, 2018 by insert_anagram_here

[RShara]

...But I'm not being defensive?  I'm actually confused as to why you're upset.  I tried to explain why I act the way I do.  I want to be both helpful and educational.  Sometimes it means I agree with a theory, and sometimes it means I don't.  And I'm going to argue it the same way either way.

And again, we're not tag-teaming you.  We're independently posting our thoughts.  I haven't said a word to Calderis directly in days except in relation to the specific topic, in the actual threads where we happen to interact.  That we happen to agree on many things is a coincidence.  We happen to DISagree on many things too.  It's just a coincidence of timing.

I honestly don't know what you want me to do?  I understand the perception you have, but what do you want us to do about it?  I can stop posting, but I can't honestly believe that would be a benefit to the fandom.  I can't, in all honesty and integrity, agree to a theory when I don't think it holds water.  So I can either remain silent, or I can express my opinion.  I can try and temper the method by which I express my opinion, but that only goes so far.  When I completely disagree on the probability of a theory, that's going to come through, no matter how many soft words I try to use.

And thinking on this for a while, I honestly am kind of getting annoyed here.  It feels like you're saying you should be allowed to post what you want when you want, but that I and/or Calderis need put a sock in it sometimes.  That's not really fair to us, and I don't think it's fair to people who are interested in book quotes and WoBs that are relevant to theories.

 

Edit: Anyway, again, no offense is ever intended here.  I'm just very forthright in what I say and think.  I'm sure we could all take a step back and rethink our tones and positions once in a while.  I agree that we should stop derailing now.

Edited February 24, 2018 by RShara

[Mestiv]

1 hour ago, DimChatz said:

I think a good place to start for the future is for all users to be treated the same despite personal relationships between them and the moderation. Public call outs and examples cannot be allowed to me made. Warnings where no names are mentioned are fine. Quietly removing especially offensive comments is fine as long as in the name of transparency the specific reason is mentioned and comments don't simply disappear.

I agree with you very strongly on this. I think other staff members do too. I will advocate we create some kind of guideline on how to handle what. When it's ok to do things publicly and when we should stick with PMs. 

After all, there's this saying that goes something like this: Praise publicly, criticize privately.

1 hour ago, DimChatz said:

Threads that call out other threads and are being judgmental should not be permitted. One of them got locked but the one that preceded it displayed a high level of condescension by which I felt personally attacked was allowed to proceed, in a subforum that isn't even for meta discussion. In that thread like minded individuals where called a gang and it spread the false narrative that “Shalladin Shippers are everywhere” and yet no action was taken.

You are right, that such topics should be accepted and there won't come anything good out of them.

1 hour ago, DimChatz said:

Moderators and admins should be beyond reproach and a big part of how this is accomplished is by the image that is elected to be presented and by considering how much impact their words and actions have, by mere virtue of their position. A community takes its cues from it leaders. Those leaders should be especially careful of the example they set.

Unfortunately, there is no easy way to ensure that. As long as we take part in discussions, there can be some disagreement etc. When we moderate, we can make mistakes, not be as calm as we should etc. You are right that we, as staff, should be an example to other users. That's why I'd like to encourage everyone to actually report posts by staff members if you find them not up to expected standards.

1 hour ago, insert_anagram_here said:

Funny, English is my second language as well, so let's hope this works.

Well, the original @Dreamstorm post (the OP's position - which wasn't intended to be OP, hence the 'quotes' in my original post) didn't intent to make a thread in the first place, but posted her opinion on another thread trying to support another user and his dissatisfaction to the moderation. I'm assuming it was moved by you into this separate thread, in order to initiate discussion with her and other members that share her view. Some people though, totally clueless to the situation, probably assumed that 'OP made this thread in order to express her opposition', that's why they gave us their own opposing perspective on the matter, trying to support the moderation (as if moderation needs support in any matter) even though 'OP' didn't even request it in the first place.

Having an antagonizing opinion being re-enforced when you are trying to initiate negotiations with the weaker side of the argument really didn't help the promotion of discussion. That's what I was trying to say.

Ok, now I understand and I see your point. That was indeed a bit reckless that I split that post into a separate thread without consulting @Dreamstorm first. So, Dreamstorm, if you didn't agree with what I did, I sincerely apologize. 

I also see why you find the voices of staff supporters counter-productive to the discussion. Personally, I think those voices have their place here too. Staff members are different people, some of us take critique better, some worse. Chaos himself mentioned that he had trouble sleeping because of this thread. He worries that we're not doing good job as moderators team. Other staff members are worried too. We care about this community greatly. We committed a lot of our time and energy to it. Reading even one positive opinion about our work was really reinforcing. No positive opinion made us think that we don't have to change a thing. Those opinions made us more determined to change and be better for everyone.

1 hour ago, insert_anagram_here said:

It's probably because I'm a programmer, and already people told me it's not a good idea to put people into code, but I'm going to voice it anyway. Maybe we could use optional tags in order to denote what kind of responses we are expecting to receive? (kind of like Access Modifiers for the IT related ) [Talk] for a purely opinions expressed, [Theory] for a purely hypothetical scenario [Challenge] to challenge that theory with WOBs and in book evidence, [InBook] to provide in book evidence when bringing a point into the discussion. Or something like that. Yeah I know it's way too orderly to work on people, but maybe another idea could sprout from this one that could actually work?

That is an interesting suggestion. Feel free to propose it on the OB board, if it finds traction, I think we can even pin a topic with list of such tags, so people know what to expect where. If the community likes it, I see no problem in making it happen.

[Comatose]

Wow, this thread is hot.  I have been composing a post since I got home today and have not been able to keep up.  

To start off (and at the risk of being so meta as to moderate a thread about thread moderation) I would like to remind everyone that the focus of this thread is recognizing and responding to concerns about site moderation.  Concerns about individual members who are not staff can be addressed through private discussions if the members are comfortable, or through the usual PM/Report process with staff that we are currently discussing.  I understand that people got on to this subject organically, but think there are better ways to resolve issues with personal behavior than here.  

Now on to the subject of the thread.  

Thank-you everyone for the time and effort that has been put into these posts, and for taking the plunge to bring these criticisms to light.  I know that some of this conversation has been uncomfortable and frustrating, but I think that only highlights how necessary it is, and thank people for being vulnerable here.  I think it’s really cool and  all of these posts have made me feel very lucky to be a part of this community, even though I do not post much.

In the interests of moving this discussion forward I thought I would take a brief moment to summarize some of the key points.  I will be omitting items I feel like have been sufficiently discussed/dealt with and will be focusing on the discussion going forward, but that should not be the end of things, and discussions I would love for points not in this summary to continue to be discussed.  Please note that my intent is as stated: to summarize, and so if I leave your point out it is not an intentional move on my part to discourage you to continue to raise it.  Please feel free to highlight any important omissions.  

One of the breakdowns in communication I’ve been witnessing is the ever tricky distinction between explanations and excuses.  Party A offers concern.  Party B feels they need to explain where they are coming from to give context and offers explanation.  Party A then feels like their concern is not heard and that Party B is offering excuses.  In what I hope is a helpful way, I’ve tried to highlight concerns raised by members, explanations offered by staff, and suggestions for further discussion.  To be clear, the explanations are not meant to excuse staff conduct or to dismiss concerns, but to provide context.  My hope is that, in light of context, our suggested steps forward can help address those concerns which up until now have been felt to be unheard.  

Shardcast

Concern - The panel failed to provide adequate coverage and support for the positives of Kaladin and Shallan’s romantic pairing and adequate critique of Adolin and Shallan’s relationship, leading to supporters of Kaladin and Shallan feeling like the ‘official Shard view” was against them and that their voice was less legitimate.

Context/Explanation - Some may have noticed, but in order to provide more regular content, we are shaking things up by rotating through different casters based on availability and interest.  The ASK Shardcast was my first one, and I did a lot of outlining on it, so flaws are probably my fault and I take full responsibility.  As Chaos said, the fact that the panel was biased came about because of a mixture of who was interested and who was available.  I think as a group we did not recognize how much strong discourse on all sides was needed for this discussion.  The circumstances surrounding the creation of the cast is definitely not an excuse.  I know we all appreciate the opportunity to make the content we are providing better, so thank-you for the feedback.

Points For Further Discussion - In the future, we need to do better than just identifying bias when discussing  divisive issue like this one.  We as content providers obviously failed to recognize the importance of this debate for our audience, and in the future we should make efforts to make sure differing views are better represented on contentious issues.  

Note - One small aside: @insert_anagram_here , I wanted to offer a personal apology to you.  In an effort to add some substance to our discussion of Kaladin and Shallan’s relationship, I quoted your post from the thread.  I thought the points you raised were really interesting and thought-provoking, and was hoping to use them to provide some support for the Kaladin and Shallan pairing.  I hindsight, I realize that having your words used, and then remarked upon, without an opportunity to immediately respond, would have been very frustrating, and I’m sorry I put you through that, especially without consulting you first.  

 

Closing ASK Thread

Concern -  Closing the ASK Thread (a) sent a message that certain opinions and interests were not welcome on the shard and (b) destroyed a space that a subset of the larger fan community used as their primary place for communicating.  

Context/Explanation - As others have stated, this was not intended to have the effect that it did.  We as a staff deliberated extensively for a long period of time on what to do about this thread and the large volume of reports that were generated as a result of it.  In the end, our concern over members who said things about the thread made them feel unsafe or that it made them feel the Shard was ‘toxic,’ as well as the burgeoning of a too-busy thread with too many topics for really productive discussion were the contributing factors in our choice to close it.  While we came to a decision, the group was very much divided, and it was not easy for any of us.  Dealing with conflict is tough, and every staff who has posted thus far has admitted this one could have gone better.  We are definitely committed to improving how we handle similar issues in the future.  

Points for Further Discussion - We have talked a little about options for keeping quality character discussions going (character subforums / topic specific threads), and I hope that conversation continues, but from my read of things the point that has not been addressed is how the ASK became an important community space, and that (if I’m understanding correctly) members feel displaced now that it is closed.  I understand that opening new threads will not necessarily assist in the community concern, so I’m curious about what the users who were/are members of the ‘ASK Community’ for lack of a better term feel would be a suitable replacement/solution?  Subcultures and new relationships are an exciting part of forum communities, and are absolutely something the staff want to facilitate.  

One thought I had was using the “Social Groups, Clans, And Guilds” sub forum to continue the community aspect of the ASK thread, and then allow discussions to continue in more specific topics (the more character topics the better in my opinion!), but since I was not a member of the community, that suggestion is obviously only as good as the endorsements it receives so I’d like to hear what people have to say.  

 

Moderation Practices Generally

Concerns - From reading this thread, my understanding is that the two major concerns being raised about moderation practices generally are (a) that the Staff is heavy handed when moderating certain less familiar members, and unfairly lax or informal with older users and friends, and (b) that Staff opinions in regular discussions receive preferential treatment (either through excessive moderation of opposing views, or through discouraging debate through sheer force of reputation).

Explanation/Context - Previous posters have done a pretty good job of providing their opinions and background information on this one, and since it is fairly person specific, I will try to do my best to pull out general points.   Generally, silencing debate has never been the intent of the staff.  However, that does not mean that certain actions we take do not unintentionally give that impression, so I am glad that members had the courage to raise the issue and generate discussion.  I think we as staff take a lot of pride in what we do here, and so it is difficult not to take critiques of this kind personally.  Critiquing the job we are doing as moderators, for better or worse, is personal for us.  The best we can do is deal with the discomfort, communicate our emotions in positive or useful ways, and try to come up with effective solutions.  

We should focus on those that try to limit character discussion by others, rather than those that were trying to discuss characters, got offended and reacted badly. In too many cases we dealt the results and not cause of problems.

One the point of further moderation - we already do a great deal of moderation that likely isn’t noticed because, for better or worse, we do it privately.  There is always room to improve. It is also important to acknowledge that we are only human and we only have so much time in a day.  We are not omniscient and omnipresent, and we cannot micromanage every aspect of the forums.  Reports are a way of directing our attention to areas that need it.  If you have other suggestions for how we can make it easier to report or to PM staff, please let us know.  We do strive to being active with our moderation, but we can only do so much (I know this is getting excuse-ish, but my intention is just to recognize the reality).  

It is important to remember that as a staff we have a responsibility to the entire community.  That means engaging in a balancing act when interests of different segments of the community come into conflict.  We are always open to discuss new and better ways to handle things, but things must continued to be balanced and handled.  As part of their participation in a wider community, it is important that members accept that things might not always be done to their liking.  It is equally important that we as staff strive to make sure people feel heard and acknowledged, even when their suggestions or desires are not acted upon in the way they wished.  

Points for Further Discussion - We need to find balance between public scolding and dealing with people via PM. Some public guidelines about it would be nice.  Public statements about conduct are useful for educating the community on standards, and to be transparent, but we all agree they should be handled with care.  Not mentioning names in public warnings is a good idea that we can work with.  

Staff have always and will continue to be careful about how we present ourselves and the words we choose.  We acknowledge and recognize that we do not always meet this standard, but I want to assure you guys that this is definitely a standard we hold ourselves to.  Staff members participating in regular discussions need to be aware, that their staff badge acts as a megaphone. Everything they write is just “louder” than what others say.

_______________

This discussion is going to be difficult no matter how we deal with it, but I do think it is a useful conversation and hope it continues.  By virtue of our power and position, I understand that members are going to be intimidated to bring this kind of critique forward.  From the staff perspective, answering these critiques is going to require us to be vulnerable and acknowledge some shortcomings that are uncomfortable.  I do not have specific points for this discussion, but I would just like to encourage everyone to remember that we are all here out of a mutual desire to talk about Brandon’s books, that we are all human, and that wrongness can be identified and addressed with kindness.  With the goal of finding a resolution that people can live with, we are, hopefully, all on the same side.  

I know a lot of staff have already weighed in on this, so I hope that the usefulness at this post will outweigh the negative impact of me adding yet another staff voice.  To conclude, continuing to point out problems or issues is useful to a point, but it can also get in the way of resolution and outcomes.  I hope that was helpful and not a total waste of text.  Thank you again to everyone who is participating, and please remember to try to focus on what we can do to resolve the issues.

[maxal]

Honestly, I am baffled. I understand some posters have issues and need to vent out, but venting out on @Calderis and @RShara? To state it isn't hospitable when the accused are trying to understand what is being held against them? What's wrong with them? What have they done which is so reprehensible?

Some posters enjoy putting out WoB, some posters are better than others at it (I, for instance, I suck at quoting WoB): I honestly do not understand why someone furthering the discussion by supplementing it with relevant WoB is seen as something negative. 

I sincerely do not want @Calderis nor @RShara to stop posting nor to start feeling their contribution is not appreciated. I also do not want their argumentation style being viewed as something negative: both posters have said they were very open to listen to critics if they ever behaved in an aggressive nor unsuitable manner. Hence, I don't understand the added polemic. 

We each have our argumentation style. I tend to write more emotional, sometimes inspired, sometimes not, post over favorite subjects. I will mention WoB and occasionally quote them, but I am not great at consistently doing it. I am also poor at fishing out quotes from the book, I don't have an ebook and I usually don't have an hour to seek for it. If I can find it quick enough, I'll put it, but most of my posts do not have them.

This is my writing style, some may like it, some may hate it: everyone is free to ignore it if they do not find it to their personal tastes. Other posters have different writing style. Why is the closure of one thread creating such a chaos? Everyone is doing their best here, the thread, even if well loved by some, was creating bigger problems which have nothing to do with its predominant opinion. 

Everyone is doing their best here, constructive criticism is always welcome, but criticism for the shake of criticism, I don't know. It doesn't seem like the right approach. With this, I'd like to have everyone remember why we are here: to share our interest into Brandon Sanderson's work. We all have our ways to do so, none are mutually exclusive, all are inclusive, even when we vehemently disagree.

[Vissy]

For what it's worth @Comatose, I like the idea of creating an ASK-style thread in the Social Groups subforum. In fact I think it's a very reasonable suggestion. It would be nicely out of the way but still a space for free discussion about anything we like related to the topic. 

[RShara]

Just now, Vissy said:

For what it's worth @Comatose, I like the idea of creating an ASK-style thread in the Social Groups subforum. In fact I think it's a very reasonable suggestion. It would be nicely out of the way but still a space for free discussion about anything we like related to the topic. 

Hey Vissy, if I've ever given the impression that I would want that type of thread "Out of the way" I apologize.  Let's be honest.  I absolutely have.  And I'm sorry.  I think having multiple character discussion threads on the main forums is fine, and I'd be hotly interested in anything involving Jasnah and Dalinar (not as a couple, you dirty dirty people).

[Vissy]

5 minutes ago, RShara said:

Hey Vissy, if I've ever given the impression that I would want that type of thread "Out of the way" I apologize.  Let's be honest.  I absolutely have.  And I'm sorry.  I think having multiple character discussion threads on the main forums is fine, and I'd be hotly interested in anything involving Jasnah and Dalinar (not as a couple, you dirty dirty people).

You haven't. I simply enjoyed the format of a "all-you-can eat buffet of ASK" megathread, and as Comatose rightly pointed out, it was a somewhat of a hub for a few of us, and as a social group it could exist without the negative side-effects. Honestly it might even be better to re-open the ASK thread and move it all the way over to the social groups subforum with perhaps a mod post for explanation. 

Edited February 24, 2018 by Vissy

[Orlok Tsubodai]

In response to @maxal’s post and more generally, we’ve responded to the dialogue between R’Shara and Anagram through PMs in a way which I think satisfies both sides. I think it important that this thread is focused on overall moderation improvements an how to improve character discussion, rather than discussing particular members. I and the rest of the staff are very happy to discuss this or any other concerns of any related nature through PMs.

[BraidedRose]

 

10 hours ago, Jofwu said:

BraidedRose, if you're ever in a character or relationship (or any other) discussion and feel like somebody is dismissing the very value of that discussion, we'd definitely like to know about it.

Personally, I was under the impression that the issues in ASK were more about people wanting to talk but being unable to get a word in--not people dismissing the value of those conversations.

@Alderant responded before I could and basically already clarified my point but I was saying that dismissing the value of those conversations was happening outside the ASK thread, not in it. Thus closing it worsened that particular problem rather than solving it. But I appreciate what you are saying about reporting those instances and I will look to do so if necessary in the future. 

4 hours ago, Alderant said:

I think both ways on this. While I can see the importance of not segregating the fandom and the practicality of not having a dedicated character forum with regards to making spoilers and such easier to manage, I do think that, with the overwhelming amount of non-character related threads already in existence, trying to add a large amount of character threads into the various boards that already contain a large number of threads would add to the frustration of those who don't want to see the topics. I can easily see others getting frustrated with having to scroll through or past threads that they think should be there just to find the threads that they like, that were once on the front page.

I do think, however, that a dedicated board to character discussion isn't a bad idea--we already have a dedicated board for Cosmere Theories, and it hasn't really segregated the fandom who want to post in there from being able to post in specific book threads. And people will still have questions, ideas, and thoughts on the books, but perhaps restricting in-depth character discussion to a separate board, like we do for the really in-depth cosmere theories, and still allowing general, lower-level character discussion to their respective book boards, wouldn't be such a disaster in the making.

I basically agree with everything Alderant said here and would co-sign this post if I could. 

4 hours ago, Vissy said:

I'd say that the problem is more in the context. Those who enjoy character discussion, relationships, shipping and so on are already seen in a negative light due to the ASK discussion megathread. I think if there is a separate board for character discussions, there is a real danger of this feeling of alienation turning permanent. The only way to get rid of that is to force people to interact with one another. That's not too much to ask on a fan discussion forum.

That's one way to look at it and I can see why that might be a concern, but on the flip side creating a place that is set aside for in depth character discussion could be seen as building it into the fabric of the community in an official way so it's not automatically negative. I certainly don't want it to be seen as "out of the way" but just because there is a dedicated board doesn't mean there has to be complete separation as Alderant pointed out so well above. 

@Comatose your summary of this overall discussion is helpful and appreciated. I am glad that this conversation is happening because it seems that there are several problems that have been brewing for some time. The people who are upset here, I believe, have reason to be. I don't believe anyone is trying to be difficult or stir up drama, people just want to be heard and see their concerns addressed with positive changes now that these issues have been brought to a head. 

[+Extesian]

Ok time for me to contribute because I'm on an island in the Great Barrier Reef and this is occupying my mind. 

First, some qualifying information. I am not a moderator or an admin. I have a pretty title for helping out a little with getting Arcanum set up. But my opinions mean no more than any other user. 

Secondly, I have been around longer than the post-OB entrants,sure, but still only 15 months. So I'm still relatively new.

Thirdly, I do not care one iota about shipping conversations. I therefore do not contribute to them. My input here is regarding the comments on the staff. And I have to emphasise that this is not aimed at any one person or any one 'side' of the argument. It's a plea, not an attack.

All I want to ask is that people be nice, pleasant and civilized. The staff here are not paid. They're not in it for popularity. They're not in it for reputation. They're not kids looking for power. They're people who love Brandon's works and spend a lot of their free time in service to the community. This is not some pop-up chatroom where people name their mates admin. This is the official Brandon Sanderson fansite where most of the staff have been serving this community for the better part of a decade. They're people with jobs, family and limited time to spend, and they spend much of that time building a place that is supposed to be welcoming and devoted to making the Sanderson experience more enjoyable. 

This thread is about commenting on the administration of this site. That is a worthwhile thing. I understand that no moderation action can please everyone.  But please remember that not one staff member is on here for some petty power trip. They are wonderful, devoted people who are doing their best to deal with a level of tension here i haven't seen before. 

So please, be passionate about Brandon's stories, whether you're into realmatics and lore like me, or character development like the shippers. Both are equally legitimate ways to engage with this world. But don't let your passion turn into tribalism, judgement, anger or aggression. There is no us and them. We're all here for the same reason, to enjoy the worlds Brandon has created and forensically analyze them. 

But please, most of all, don't be cruel to the people that work hard to make this place happen. They need your feedback to help this place work. They don't need you to be aggressive, accuse them of bias and be cruel about the job they do without credit or benefit. They are good people, each and every one, and they deserve better. 

And please, they are moderators because of their experience and love of Brandon. Don't ask them not to contribute. Yes they must have a higher standard, but they have the right to contribute and express opinions as private Sharders. Having a moderator title doesn't mean everything they say they say as a mod. They have every right to contribute to discussions. If they don't then why would anyone ever choose to be one! 

Edited February 25, 2018 by Extesian
Edited out a short section with wording that had offended people, for which I certainly apologise, my post is meant to be supportive not divisive :)

[Kaymyth]

I find it very interesting (...odd?) that so many people have expressed that they feel that character discussion is looked down upon and discouraged.

Historically, I've been much more active on the Mistborn boards. (A lot less so these days since my focus has shifted more over to the Shard Discord.) When I started on the Shard, I lived and breathed Mistborn. And there's been a ton of character discussion in that section. The Steris Appreciation Thread. An entire thread debating whose fault it most is that Bleeder got so messed up in the head. Heck, we even managed to weather a thread that hated on Wayne without the kind of contention I've seen in the reports that have come through the last few months. Some people were upset and we kept an eye on it, but for the most part people were very good about policing their own reactions and made a concerted effort to express their feelings in a constructive way.

 

[insert_anagram_here]

The thread was aptly titled 'Adolin-Shallan-Kaladin' (had three character names in the title) because people participating in it were expected to talk about the characters and not ‘shipping’. Quite frankly, at this point, I feel that a lot of the people that use the word do not actually know what it means.

From Google:

Please note the "rather than depicted in the series itself." part. Shipping denotes that it is purely fan fiction, most of the times with characters that don't have any romantic interactions between them. And it is this word and the misconceptions surrounding its definition, that is one of the main sources of this whole misunderstanding. Certain people describe a certain character relationship as 'shipping' when it clearly exists in a book, at least as a friendly relationship, while it’s romantic aspect is implied by the text in the book. So just by dismissing the analysis done on that relationship as 'shipping' maybe they didn’t take the time needed to understand the topic.  (There was a Shardcast about the ‘love triangle’ so I think it’s safe to assume that both relationships referenced in a ‘triangle’ were at least present in the book in some way)

The ASK thread involved very little fanfiction. Please take a moment to find posts from users such as @PhineasGage or @DeployParachuteor @maxal in there. By using the word 'shipping' to describe the level of character and text analysis done by these people is demeaning to the amount of work they put into crafting and supporting their arguments. All of that useful analysis was lost and locked in that thread because people were being dismissive of the endeavor, exactly by calling it 'shipping'. 

The misunderstanding of the word had made a lot of people include any character analysis topics into the ASK thread, and subsequently into the word 'shipping' . Shallan’s split personalities? In there. Adolin’s motivation? In there. Kaladin’s multi-colored stone symbolism? In there.

There was a general criticism and passive aggressive atmosphere on the subforum as well, (i.e. http://www.17thshard.com/forum/topic/64996-ob-what-topic-do-you-feel-has-been-discussed-to-death/ ) which gave off the impression that some people didn't want to involve themselves or acknowledge such discussions as legitimate, since they considered them to be mundane and/or immature. This was easily misinterpreted as “People that have strong feelings on certain matters, or were interested to discuss feelings of characters, please contain themselves in the ASK thread”. That's why so many people have expressed that they feel that character discussion is looked down upon and discouraged in the first place. So all character analysis ended up in the ASK thread.

This has nothing to do with 'shippers getting a corner to share their fanfiction’ . This is about having a place to discuss characters and analyze relationships (not necessarily romantic ones) and especially without being called 'shippers'.

[Vissy]

1 hour ago, insert_anagram_here said:

The ASK thread involved very little fanfiction. Please take a moment to find posts from users such as @PhineasGage or @DeployParachuteor @maxal in there. By using the word 'shipping' to describe the level of character and text analysis done by these people is demeaning to the amount of work they put into crafting and supporting their arguments. All of that useful analysis was lost and locked in that thread because people were being dismissive of the endeavor, exactly by calling it 'shipping'. 

The misunderstanding of the word had made a lot of people include any character analysis topics into the ASK thread, and subsequently into the word 'shipping' . Shallan’s split personalities? In there. Adolin’s motivation? In there. Kaladin’s multi-colored stone symbolism? In there.

This is the part that I'm worried about as well. There was a lot of genuinely good discussion that a lot of us would like to revisit, and those who are interested in this topic would certainly find interesting in the future as well. That's why I'd ideally want to either sticky the thread somewhere so that all of that time and effort doesn't get lost forever, or that as I suggested earlier, the thread gets re-opened and moved to the Social Groups subforum where it won't suck away any and all character discussion into itself but where people can still go and discuss, and access the troves of lengthy analysis and theorizing that we did.

[NotBurtReynolds]

19 hours ago, RShara said:

An Arcanist just works on Arcanum.  We snip, transcribe and add to the WoB database. 

Thanks for the definition..I was trying to answer what an arcanist is for my wife the other day and I just ended up showing her a post where you had rattled off the complete list facts for Horneater/Listener commonalities and said; "I could probably come up with this list, given some time and thought as they are known facts. I'd still probably overlook some though. She did this list in a few minutes, seemingly off the top of her head and given prior experience I really like the chances of it's accuracy. Arcanists seem to be like some sort of Cosmere Alexa, but I'm not exactly sure."

19 hours ago, RShara said:

I am interested, invested in, and passionate about this fandom.  I like discussing theories, and I like providing evidence for or against an idea.  I have the ebooks in front of me, and I'm familiar with Arcanum, so I can get quotes quickly.  Apparently...this is...not pleasing to you? 

Maybe not to that person, but it's pleasing to me and I have to think I'm in the majority. I consider the service Rshara and Calderis(and others, but they are the ones that seem to be most active when I am) provides in these forums as invaluable. And this is coming from someone who's been shot down by their knowledge more times then the reverse I understand frustrations with what some may see as pedantic corrections but I think the longer you read and interact on these forums, the more you realize that pedantic corrections are  really, really necessary  in order to have productive Cosmere discussions. It can be a bit of a learning curve, as you need to know a lot of the specific distinctions  before you can understand just how important those specific distinctions are.

I imagine the Cosmere as a picture that's slowing being colored in where the black lines are drawn but only partially revealed by what has been written textually/WoB's. Because the Cosmere has some really hard and fast rules that can't be broken, like the black lines of a picture. Now we can color in different areas and fill out blank spaces with our theories and guesses and we can even try to fill out some of the unknown black lines too. What we can't is go outside the black lines that have already been drawn. And if what you're trying to color goes completely outside of the what has already been given as possible, then the entire picture gets scribbled up. That's where I see the value of the Arcanists. We regular folks may not see the black lines that have already been drawn because we've forgotten something from the books, or haven't made a connection, or haven't seen a WoB. So they come in to tell us(in what I generally see as a gentle manner), "Hey, you can't color there. Here's the WoB/text/etc explaining why..You might want to go back that way."  And there's not just corrections. I see plenty of affirmations as well, where people get arcane WoB's supporting their thoughts that they may have never found on their own.

Can we all just try to remember that tone is really hard to convey on the internet and to cut the Arcanists the appropriate amount of slack whenever your first impulse is to take their correction as an attack? The slack we ourselves would probably like granted to us if the situations were reversed? It may be frustrating when seemingly every time you put forth an idea it gets smacked aside with logic and evidence from an Arcanist, but would you rather stay wrong? I believe the Arcanists help keep us grounded in known Cosmere Reality which in turn leads to a higher quality of discourse. Quality over the possible quantity of unchecked and unfounded wild speculation. Any time you find yourself on the opposing side of being more informed and more educated, you may want to check your side

23 hours ago, Chaos said:

 I hate Zane.

Really?? Oh, thank you. Me too. I've never felt so safe. We're friends forever.

23 hours ago, Chaos said:

You know I hate Sixth of Dusk.

Lifetime friendship revoked. Mortal enemies engaged.

Edited February 25, 2018 by firstRainbowRose
Please avoid double posting. Thank you!

[firstRainbowRose]

2 hours ago, Vissy said:

There was a lot of genuinely good discussion that a lot of us would like to revisit

Oh look, more topics like the ones Eric keeps on mentioning. Want to test our sincerity, maybe starting a topic about one of these subjects is the way to do it.

[Vissy]

47 minutes ago, firstRainbowRose said:

Oh look, more topics like the ones Eric keeps on mentioning. Want to test our sincerity, maybe starting a topic about one of these subjects is the way to do it.

Ok, I genuinely have no idea what you're on about here.

[Comatose]

I think what firstRainbowRose is getting at is that for now the place to keep those individual discussions going is in new, more topic specific threads.  Our hope is that the conversation in each will be more effective and thorough if it is spread out instead of being shoved together.  Take insert_anagram_here's point:

6 hours ago, insert_anagram_here said:

The misunderstanding of the word had made a lot of people include any character analysis topics into the ASK thread, and subsequently into the word 'shipping' . Shallan’s split personalities? In there. Adolin’s motivation? In there. Kaladin’s multi-colored stone symbolism? In there.

I know people felt pressured to discuss everything relating to Shallan, Kaladin and Adolin in ASK, but that is not really the way things have worked historically, and going forward the staff is committed to encouraging multiple topics and discouraging concentration like this.  If you look at other book forums, topics like "Shipping", "Shallan's Split Personalities", "Adolin's Motiviation" and "Kaladin's Multi-Coloured Stone Symbolism" would normally all be separate  topics.  Discussing them all at once makes it difficult to get through a discussion, and makes it difficult for later users to find what they are looking for later, since instead of being separated into separate topics, it's all lumped together in a 97 page conglomeration.  I may have missed others, but my understanding is that, aside from general book reaction threads, mega threads dealing with all facets of characterization for three characters is somewhat unique.  If you want those conversations to continue, the staff would encourage you to start posting about whatever conversation you want to continue, and we would be supportive of that and on the look-out for people trying to shut down such discussions.  

 If you look at the OB sub-forum now, there are already character threads about Jasnah, Navani, and a Shallan character analysis.  We want to encourage the development of more specific character discussion topics.  Character discussion has always been one of my favourite things to read on the site (though I do enjoy theories too), but I know I probably missed a lot in ASK just because of how much was going on at once.

4 hours ago, Vissy said:

This is the part that I'm worried about as well. There was a lot of genuinely good discussion that a lot of us would like to revisit, and those who are interested in this topic would certainly find interesting in the future as well. That's why I'd ideally want to either sticky the thread somewhere so that all of that time and effort doesn't get lost forever, or that as I suggested earlier, the thread gets re-opened and moved to the Social Groups subforum where it won't suck away any and all character discussion into itself but where people can still go and discuss, and access the troves of lengthy analysis and theorizing that we did.

The beauty of the Forums is that, even though conversation in all threads dies down eventually, those conversations are never lost.  You can always go back and reread old topics.  I still go back to the TWG archives and look up old posts from when I was first starting out in the fandom.  Will they move on to lower pages?  Yes, but that's the way of forums.  Hopefully having separate topics will make them easier to find later on, and as you discuss further, you are always free to link back to previous posts from the ASK thread and build the discussion.  From my perspective (feel free to disagree) continuing to have everything in one mega-thread makes individual conversations more difficult to find. 

My suggestion about the community forum was meant to address the points raised by some that a distinct community was forming in ASK and that closing the thread took that community space away.  ASK was a discussion thread, and in my opinion it should remain where it is so users who want to go back and read it can find it.  Going forward, what my suggestion was is that any character discussion continues on the main book boards, but that any 'community chats' that would have occured in ASK before it was closed could be continued there, if that is something people want or are interested in.  If you check out the Reckoners RP, they handled this by having RP Threads for RP and "Question" threads for general chatting.  For the most part, a lot of 'chat' now seems to occur on Discord, but I understand that Discord is not always that welcoming for people, so the Community Forums may be able to fill that void?  

Again, it was only a suggestion from someone who was not a part of the "ASK Community".  I hope that clarification helps, and feel free to let me know if anything doesn't make sense and how you folks feel about that.  

@Vissy, if my explanation is not addressing your concern about losing previous discussion, would you mind clarifying why you feel the conversation will be lost, and what specifically you are worried about?  

[little wilson]

Not to derail this thread into defining the term shipping, but that definition, @insert_anagram_here, is very outdated. The best current definition for it that I've found is this one, on Know Your Meme:

It covers both fanfic and canon. It's derived from the word "relationship," and most people who use it are using it in that sense. Any fictional relationship discussion would fall under this definition of shipping.

Now, it's fine for people to have differing definitions for slang terms, but you should understand that most people don't hold to that dictionary.com definition posted, so please do not take offense when people call some of the discussion that happened in ASK shipping. It's merely a descriptor rather than insulting/dismissive (but if you think someone is being dismissive or insulting in their use of the term, let us know). 

I'm a shipper. I will gladly own up to that. It's not a dirty word and we shouldn't be avoiding it.

[Vissy]

45 minutes ago, Comatose said:

The beauty of the Forums is that, even though conversation in all threads dies down eventually, those conversations are never lost.  You can always go back and reread old topics.  I still go back to the TWG archives and look up old posts from when I was first starting out in the fandom.  Will they move on to lower pages?  Yes, but that's the way of forums.  Hopefully having separate topics will make them easier to find later on, and as you discuss further, you are always free to link back to previous posts from the ASK thread and build the discussion.  From my perspective (feel free to disagree) continuing to have everything in one mega-thread makes individual conversations more difficult to find.

@Vissy, if my explanation is not addressing your concern about losing previous discussion, would you mind clarifying why you feel the conversation will be lost, and what specifically you are worried about?  

You misunderstood what I was suggesting. I cannot stress this enough: I do not want to replace all discussions with a single megathread. I want to have a completely separate thread, in the Social Groups subforum, for people who like to talk about the topics that were discussed in ASK thread. This will not take anything away from other discussions as it will be on a completely different part of the forums. 

Edited February 25, 2018 by Vissy

[Comatose]

Ah, I see.  I thought you were referring to previous discussions in ASK.  So the conversations you are worried about losing are future community discussions that would have taken place in ASK if it were not closed?  Keeping character items in threads and having a group for community chats was what I was trying to suggest, so it seems we are in agreement?

So, to clarify (and please do correct me if I am still not understanding):

(1) You want to continue discussing characters in the appropriate book subforums;

(2) You want a separate space (in Social Groups) where the community aspect of ASK can continue.  The discussions you were concerned about losing were future discussions among community members, not previous ASK discussions, which will remain where they are.  

If that is the case, then I hope that the points that Chaos proposed, with the addition of a Social Group thread for the ASK community, will address the concerns?  Here they are for reference:

On 2/24/2018 at 0:04 PM, Chaos said:

• First, writing a post acknowledging that having discussion with staff in a contentious thread can be difficult, and new policy to counteract that (short version: staff don't converse in divisive or heated topics)
• Another post describing how moderation actually occurs and how it is determined moderation is necessar Short version: we discuss it, get people who aren't involved in the thread to help make a judgment. It actually self corrects for bias really well. Obviously we don't get everything right but the core premise that we are too biased to judge what is respectful vs. disrespectful is not true, and this will explain how things work in practice.
• ‎A follow up to the ASK closure post describing the plan for character discussion that I talked about earlier, as well as a list of various possible character topics to start with. But please if you want to discuss something, just make a topic now! Make a bunch of topics!
• ‎Lastly, a post somewhere describing the importance of character discussion, condescension towards a class of threads will not be tolerated, and that we will have people leave specific topics if they are causing things to get heated. We want to try and solve the issues ASK presented and leave members feeling like they can discuss what they want in a relaxed environment

On the community point, any member is free to start a thread in the Social Groups area.  If there is enough interest, I would also be happy to assist with an introductory post.  Some things to consider going forward though would be:

(1) What does membership in the group look like, and what could you put into a introduction post on the group to assist new members in determining if they would like to join; and

(2) How can the group be structured to maintain and strengthen the existing community while being open and inviting to new members?

I am also curious about what other people who have expressed their dissatisfaction with the ASK closing think about a community thread for social discussion, what one should look like, and if they think it will be useful.  It takes multiple people to make a community, so it would be good to get as much input as possible before starting it. If this is something people want to discuss further, I would suggest making a brainstorming topic in the Social Group section, and go from there, and then continue to address any further concerns about site moderation here (if there are any still outstanding which have not been addressed yet).  

[Vissy]

11 minutes ago, Comatose said:

Ah, I see.  I thought you were referring to previous discussions in ASK.  So the conversations you are worried about losing are future community discussions that would have taken place in ASK if it were not closed?  Keeping character items in threads and having a group for community chats was what I was trying to suggest, so it seems we are in agreement?

So, to clarify (and please do correct me if I am still not understanding):

(1) You want to continue discussing characters in the appropriate book subforums;

(2) You want a separate space (in Social Groups) where the community aspect of ASK can continue.  The discussions you were concerned about losing were future discussions among community members, not previous ASK discussions, which will remain where they are.  

If that is the case, then I hope that the points that Chaos proposed, with the addition of a Social Group thread for the ASK community, will address the concerns?  Here they are for reference:

On the community point, any member is free to start a thread in the Social Groups area.  If there is enough interest, I would also be happy to assist with an introductory post.  Some things to consider going forward though would be:

(1) What does membership in the group look like, and what could you put into a introduction post on the group to assist new members in determining if they would like to join; and

(2) How can the group be structured to maintain and strengthen the existing community while being open and inviting to new members?

I am also curious about what other people who have expressed their dissatisfaction with the ASK closing think about a community thread for social discussion, what one should look like, and if they think it will be useful.  It takes multiple people to make a community, so it would be good to get as much input as possible before starting it. If this is something people want to discuss further, I would suggest making a brainstorming topic in the Social Group section, and go from there, and then continue to address any further concerns about site moderation here (if there are any still outstanding which have not been addressed yet).  

I'm frustrated that you think this is a matter of agreement or disagreement. It's not, we're not even talking about the same things. I agreed with the suggestions about no separate subforums, allowing for multiple character discussion threads instead of a single one etc. from the get-go, and I think I've been pretty vocal about that. So I suppose you did not read my previous posts and jumped in based on my latest post alone? Not only that but you repeat what I've said myself multiple times. Please try to keep up with the conversation, it will make things easier for all of us, and make it easier for me to reply without constantly having to feel like I have to defend myself from things I didn't say.

Since you still didn't get what I suggested right, let me rephrase it the third time. Though honestly it feels rather dumb to make me repeat this three times. I originally suggested that the old ASK thread gets re-opened and moved to the Social Groups subforum, where it would act as the social group thread itself. Now, maybe that is not easy to do. Maybe some people do not agree with that. That's all fine, I didn't make that suggestion with the mindset of "this must be accepted or else", that wasn't the point at all, it was a throwaway suggestion I made that you latched onto like I was suggesting something completely else. 

Anyway that was my frustration vented. Hopefully in a not-too-aggressive tone. 

Edited February 25, 2018 by Vissy

[maxal]

I honestly do not see what moving the ASK thread to one of the Social group sub-forum would accomplished... It is book-related discussion, shouldn't it be housed into the book-related sub forums of the site? If an entire thread gets moved to another section of the forum, then no one will ever visit it. Unless this is the wanted result, to create a secluded place where a handful can keep on having the same conversation without fearing anyone new from joining in, but this can't be the intended goal.

Also, the idea is to create new threads focusing on a variety of subjects as opposed to have everything being tossed into one thread. The discussion which happened in it is not lost, it won't be erased, but new threads will allow more people to join in, hopefully making a environment where more posters will feel at ease to post their thoughts.

I sure intend to take the mod team advice and start new threads on my favorite subjects, but huh, I'm kinda of busy, so this will have to wait until I am done with the rush.

[Mestiv]

It occurred you me, that we, as multinational community,  can have a bit off communication issue. I don't know if it's true for other non-native speakers,  but I was shocked when I first saw the word "tribalism" used in this discussion. My immediate interpretation of it was straight out offensive (tribalism -> tribe -> some primitive tribe from before the pyramids -> primitive behaviour) and if it was directed at me I would be very unhappy. 

Turns out this word simply means us-vs-them mentality, which isn't anything offensive. However, the bad taste after the first, intuitive interpretation remains in my mind. 

That's why I have a friendly request to everyone, not as a moderator, but as a person whose English skills aren't as good as most of you: be careful with this word, ok? 

[Comatose]

Don’t worry I have been keeping up with the thread.  I read your original suggestion but misunderstood your last post to mean that a new social thread would be fine.  My reason for the repetition is only for clarity, and to catch misunderstandings like the one you just caught, as this thread has not been without contention.  I understand that can be annoying though. Please don’t feel obligated to keep responding if it is an annoyance.   

I also did not mean to imply your idea was the only one   You were just one of the only people responding at this point, and It’s tough to discuss other ideas when they are not there    The staff will be considering all of this feedback as we proceed but I didn’t mean to imply we were negotiating an agreement (must be my lawyer training getting the better of me).   All I wanted to check is if our proposed solution addressed your concerns (and the concerns of others).

Thanks for the clarification and for the input!