Re: "Mod edit title: No idea what title this should be"

[CyberAngel]

Splitted posts from misc thread + locked.

None of this fits the Misc thread nor any of the forum sections from what I can tell.

A talk about ZUN. Not fitting anywhere on a Touhou forum. Seriously.

It fits here just fine. It's a discussion of ZUN's views on society. If it's too political in your eyes then we have a whole subforum where stuff like that is discussed no problem. A discussion like this could be pretty useful and help dispel some misinformation about his stance on things that some people might believe (not everyone can pick up that stuff from the context of the works alone, you know).

But let's be frank here. The topic was obviously locked due to OP's personal stance on questions raised. And it was different from one accepted by the more prominent members here. Look, I understand it. Your place, your rules. You want to deny piracy as the main source of games for western fans, fine. You want to deny series having an appeal to lolicon fans, fine (even though some people freely used "loli" in casual conversations despite an explicit ban on the word when that case blew up and got away with it purely because of having a big "Admin's Friend" badge). But this is going outside of any clearly stated rules. OP might have voiced views that go against what ZUN believes (and you people as well), but it was done in a considerate, non-confrontational manner. Locking the topic did nothing but prevent OP or someone like them from understanding the other side better and possibly changing their opinion. Again, if you people want to keep the main discussion places politics-free then fine. But be more clear about it. It is VERY obvious when you try to be too quiet about something.

Sincerely,
someone who was nothing to say on the actual topic, but can tell repressions taking place on first sight


I moved your thread to the forum section where it fits as it looked really strange with the original locked thread -Hele

[niektory]

The mods here do seem to be quite trigger happy. I personally believe that censorship is almost always a bad thing.

[Drake]

I spoke to Hele about it and there were apparently reports of the post(s), and there was some confusion about what the topic even was at all, hence the nondescript edited title. It was more trying to open an unfocused discussion so being in its own thread even in TARC is better than stuffing it in Misc Qs. I think this is pretty understandable, even though I don't think it should have been locked.

This wasn't anything but Hele's discretion by the sound of it, and he first considered moving it to Cafe, so I really don't think accusations of censorship or forum-wide dogma are appropriate here, even if I understand why you could see that as a possibility.

[MatsuriSakuragi]

The mods here do seem to be quite trigger happy. I personally believe that censorship is almost always a bad thing.

as someone who used to be an admin here i assure you that "trigger happy" is the last thing you could consider how things work

that said we were (past tense, in context of me no longer being a mod) always free to use our own discretion to nip potential powder keg topics in the bud too, even if this wasn't really the case and more a matter of not thinking the topic was placed in the right place

then again, some people will call any sort of moderation censorship and that's also pretty funny

[Helepolis]

Apologies for the delayed reply, because it was getting late yesterday and decided to post in the morning (which is now).

There were reports which had drawn my attention. Upon reading the report I checked the post in question and here is how my thought process went:
- The post was truly not fitting the Misc thread as it didn't map with the, not to be called guidelines, information in the 1st post
- Upon splitting I couldn't understand what the actual topic was. There seemed, in my eyes, multiple topics being addressed
- This caused real confusion for me to effectively moderate the thread
- I considered moving it to the cafe, because the 'Trump topic' leaned towards that section, but then there was ZUN topic and Kancolle topic.
- Finally decided to lock and modify the thread title to express my confusion

There was no ill intend nor any motive of applying censorship or any other form of it.

If my moderation was found wrong, then anybody is free to address it and we can try to find a fitting solution together. Lashing out with cheap opportunistic and passive aggressive behaviour does nobody good. If you have personal issues with any of the moderators, then report them.

If there are any more inquiries, concerns or questions, feel free to post them here or PM me or talk to me on IRC. I will try to reply to them in between of my busy work schedule.

Cheers,

Helepolis

[CyberAngel]

Inviting to point out any issues, but when it happens it's called out as "cheap opportunistic and passive aggressive behaviour". How inspiring.

I have no issue with any part of the decision except the very last one, locking a thread. If it was done out of confusion then congratulations, you've closed off the most obvious way to address it. The only way to unlock it would be to contact you directly and that's, well... Let's just say that you people are doing a damn lousy job at looking approachable as administration members. There's always gonna be that hurdle that not everyone will even consider worth trying to jump over.

Anyway, unless that thread's OP or anyone else wants to chime in (pretty much the reason why I addressed this matter openly) I don't give a rat's ass if that thread gets unlocked or not. I just ask the staff to consider the weight of their decisions a bit better. Unnecessary actions like that might result in even more work for you to take care of later for no good reason.

[Suwako Moriya]

Independent of the reasons already provided, the posts deserved to be split off and locked because they were very disingenuous about a very touchy subject.

[Drake]

Inviting to point out any issues, but when it happens it's called out as "cheap opportunistic and passive aggressive behaviour". How inspiring.

I mean dude, your posts drip with them, I don't think there's any other way to put it. You just said yourself that you don't actually care about the thread in question, so how is it not clearly opportunistic? There are ways to address the issue without doing exactly this and it doesn't help your case whatsoever. I more or less agree the thread didn't necessarily have to be locked, even though it might have been eventually anyways, but you really could have just kept your first two paragraphs.

[CyberAngel]

Guess what, people's built up dissatisfaction with how the place is being run can burst out in moments when it has any kind of relevance. It by no means should influence how the matter is handled, though.

Yet here we are, arguing about the tone of the message.

[Drake]

Except it didn't influence how it was handled. Tone policing is one thing, but what happened here is that you displayed this behaviour in a rant, your emotionally-charged accusations were wrong in this case, you don't seem to care whether you were wrong or not anyways, and you're mad that this was pointed out. Pointing this out isn't an attack nor is it dismissive of what you're saying, you have the right to be angry about things, you're just muddling whatever your actual point is, if there even is one anymore. If you have problems with the moderation then that's okay, but you got your response as to why the thread was locked.

[MatsuriSakuragi]

ultimately i think you're taking an aging and stagnating internet message board far too seriously regardless on how you feel about how it is run when ultimately all you're doing is being pushy and aggressive over the decision a mod made over a disingenuous topic and i'm not quite sure "repression" and "censorship" are appropriate analogies to be made in cutting it short

tl;dr it's a matter of closing a dumb topic on an internet forum, not an attack on your or anyone else's human rights; please go outside

[CyberAngel]

Tone policing is one thing, but what happened here is that you displayed this behaviour in a rant, your emotionally-charged accusations were wrong in this case, you don't seem to care whether you were wrong or not anyways, and you're mad that this was pointed out.

Thank you, your armchair psychoanalysis never ceases to be amusing. Though completely baseless as usual. Projecting much?

ultimately i think you're taking an aging and stagnating internet message board far too seriously regardless on how you feel about how it is run when ultimately all you're doing is being pushy and aggressive over the decision a mod made over a disingenuous topic and i'm not quite sure "repression" and "censorship" are appropriate analogies to be made in cutting it short

tl;dr it's a matter of closing a dumb topic on an internet forum, not an attack on your or anyone else's human rights; please go outside

...I'm not even sure how it was possible to honestly misinterpret what I said THAT much. Funny to hear that I'm taking it too seriously from someone who blows things out of proportion like that.

Again, I'm not pushing for any decision or anything. The actions taken on the matter are understandable. I might have voiced some personal concerns along the way, but does that mean they shouldn't be noted because of that? Quite a way to handle feedback we have here, then.

Anyway, I'm just responding to people still hung up on my first message at this point so let's just stop. I'm okay with any further interactions but this is straying from the topic's purpose too far indeed.

[Helepolis]

What was the topic's purpose then? Please explain.

[CyberAngel]

"Please don't be so quick to lock topics, even potentially troublesome ones." I can provide further justification, if you're willing to listen.

[Helepolis]

Check. So, why didn't you just summarize it like that? Why was everything else you said found necessary in your eyes/opinion?

[CyberAngel]

To give some justification for raising a point like that. I'm not sure how conscious you were of some aspects of your decision that concerned me.

But you know, if you're just going to take everything I say in the worst light possible then fine, just ignore everything I said. I'm not going to waste energy on those who wouldn't even want listen to anything I'd like to say beyond that. Do your own job as you see fit.

[Helepolis]

I don't understand. As Drake pointed out, the first two paragraphs of your opening post were plenty to raise a complaint against the thread lock.

So my logical concern and question: Why was everything else found necessary? What does that justify?

[CyberAngel]

Just as a reminder that people already have to walk on eggshells around here. And arbitrary administrative actions out of nowhere don't make the place look any more inviting at all.

[MatsuriSakuragi]

Thank you, your armchair psychoanalysis never ceases to be amusing. Though completely baseless as usual. Projecting much?

Explaining what people are seeing when you lash out like this is not "armchair psychoanalysis", it's base-level observation of behavior. Psychoanalyzing you would be saying you have some distorted sense of justice and need to be right that you'll lash out and stand against a basic and inconsequential moderation action (no one was punished, just the disingenuous topic stopped) with nothing to gain from it except your own sense of self-satisfaction due to low self esteem or deep-seated hatred of anything that is not laissez-faire discussion on a moderated forum, regardless of how low-content the topic was.

...I'm not even sure how it was possible to honestly misinterpret what I said THAT much. Funny to hear that I'm taking it too seriously from someone who blows things out of proportion like that.

I'm not the one who is acting hostile and defensive over something so very infinitesimally small and fussing about "walking on eggshells". Blowing things out of proportion, indeed.

Again, I'm not pushing for any decision or anything. The actions taken on the matter are understandable. I might have voiced some personal concerns along the way, but does that mean they shouldn't be noted because of that? Quite a way to handle feedback we have here, then.

If the actions taken on the matter are understandable, then why the rants and hostility? Why the lashing out and calling it "voicing personal concerns"? No amount of passive-aggressive jabs and backpedaling is going to change the fact that hostility isn't going to be met warmly when it's overall baseless to begin with.


Man, why do I even care? I quit being a mod because arguing over stupid shit at length is such a waste of time. I don't even really post here anymore; I was just visiting and saw this nonsense.

[Helepolis]

Just as a reminder that people already have to walk on eggshells around here. And arbitrary administrative actions out of nowhere don't make the place look any more inviting at all.

What do you mean? Can you be more clear and precise?

[CyberAngel]

Man, why do I even care? I quit being a mod because arguing over stupid shit at length is such a waste of time. I don't even really post here anymore; I was just visiting and saw this nonsense.

Good question. Here's a thought. If you had to argue in the past for so long that it felt like a waste of time, and also felt like you had to do it this time... then maybe it's not the other people that have unreasonable problems.

What do you mean? Can you be more clear and precise?

Honestly, are you playing dumb on purpose? I've said enough, and the way my words are treated doesn't inspire me to share any more.

[MatsuriSakuragi]

Good question. Here's a thought. If you had to argue in the past for so long that it felt like a waste of time, and also felt like you had to do it this time... then maybe it's not the other people that have unreasonable problems.

Ahahaha, okay. You keep sitting here and telling yourself and the world that this is a reasonable problem and not an egregious overreaction on your part.

I'm going outside.

[Helepolis]

Honestly, are you playing dumb on purpose? I've said enough, and the way my words are treated doesn't inspire me to share any more.

In my honest opinion, you're not making sense to me and it seems to other people. Which logically I asked to explain more clearly and precise to avoid misunderstandings.

That said, if there are no other concerns/questions from other people then this thread will be ended when I wake up somewhere in the morning.

[CyberAngel]

Okay, I'll spell out my main message then. I think that your (as in site staff in general) avoidance of any potential conflict to the point of paranoia is unnecessary. Conflicts and arguments, even on touchy subjects, can have positive results, even if not immediately obvious. I'm not denying that sometimes you do need to put your foot down, like when it devolves into personal insults or arguing the same point ad nauseam. But just because a topic CAN go that way doesn't mean it should be prevented from going anywhere at all. That's it.

But eh, this argument has shown that the idea that any other point of view except one already accepted around here can have a right to exist without someone fighting tooth and nail for it is alien to the local bigwigs. Completely expected, unfortunately.

[MatsuriSakuragi]

>says "That's it."
>proceeds to add yet another passive-aggressive jab at the end



For real, I'm out this time. If I post in this thread again, ban me.

[Helepolis]

Okay, I'll spell out my main message then. I think that your (as in site staff in general) avoidance of any potential conflict to the point of paranoia is unnecessary. Conflicts and arguments, even on touchy subjects, can have positive results, even if not immediately obvious. I'm not denying that sometimes you do need to put your foot down, like when it devolves into personal insults or arguing the same point ad nauseam. But just because a topic CAN go that way doesn't mean it should be prevented from going anywhere at all. That's it.

This seems to be a mix of messages making no sense.

How did you conclude we're moderating out of paranoia? The thread was reported in the first place. Please explain.

But eh, this argument has shown that the idea that any other point of view except one already accepted around here can have a right to exist without someone fighting tooth and nail for it is alien to the local bigwigs. Completely expected, unfortunately.

This doesn't make any sense, what do you mean?

[CyberAngel]

How did you conclude we're moderating out of paranoia? The thread was reported in the first place. Please explain.

From explanations in the past, reports are supposed to be just a flag for mod attention. Any further actions are up to mod's discretion. Is that correct?

If so, then that thread lock felt like an avoidable preemptive action. Like, what's the worst that could happen with it? Some more arguing that COULD make a lock necessary later, but that's it. Or maybe it could flourish into people digging into ZUN's interviews to sum up information about views on social topics. Or maybe someone would calmly convince OP to agree with ZUN's views. But nope, all that nipped in the bud. And I don't see a good reason to choose doing that short of your salary being cut for every argument that happens on the forum.

If not, then what, are you obligated to act on each and every report? If so then hoo boy, this approach is so exploitable that I can't believe you just follow through with it.

[Helepolis]

I have explained why I locked the thread in this post. And that is honestly all of it.

All these assumptions you're making don't reflect on the reasons provided above. This is why others have concluded that you're blowing things out of proportion.

[CyberAngel]

Locking the topic did nothing but prevent OP or someone like them from understanding the other side better and possibly changing their opinion.

I just ask the staff to consider the weight of their decisions a bit better. Unnecessary actions like that might result in even more work for you to take care of later for no good reason.

Conflicts and arguments, even on touchy subjects, can have positive results, even if not immediately obvious. I'm not denying that sometimes you do need to put your foot down, like when it devolves into personal insults or arguing the same point ad nauseam. But just because a topic CAN go that way doesn't mean it should be prevented from going anywhere at all.

Like, what's the worst that could happen with it? Some more arguing that COULD make a lock necessary later, but that's it. Or maybe it could flourish into people digging into ZUN's interviews to sum up information about views on social topics. Or maybe someone would calmly convince OP to agree with ZUN's views. But nope, all that nipped in the bud.

[nav']

I have explained why I locked the thread in this post. And that is honestly all of it.

All these assumptions you're making don't reflect on the reasons provided above. This is why others have concluded that you're blowing things out of proportion.

That post says you didn't know what to do about the thread and locked it out of confusion. Basically, you decided to follow the "out of sight, out of mind" rule. No wonder people don't like the decision.

You know, this thread is painful to watch, so I would like to suggest a compromise. Your early thought was to move the thread to Shrinemaiden Cafe. Shrinemaiden Cafe is where all the political threads end up anyway. It also has threads that touch upon the topic of ZUN and Touhou, and no one seems to mind those. Thus I believe it's an acceptable course of action to reopen the thread, move it to Shrinemaiden Cafe and let it develop.