The "Toxic" Debacle

[kittypuppet]

 

Who is unhappy? a bunch of people

What are they unhappy about specifically? being labeled in a negative light

What do they want to happen? not be labeled?

Is that desire appropriate to implement? yes, seems quite reasonable, I wouldn't like it either

If so, what needs to be done to make it happen? stop using such terms, which appears to have happened

Will they still be unhappy when that's done? probably, you cant force people not to lump users they disagree with into a group and label them as something, at least it seems admins won't be doing it anymore

 

This is pretty much just it (to my knowledge).

And Mumber, there's a whole lot more people who are unhappy who just haven't spoken up. 

Edited April 3, 2015 by kittypuppet

[Mumberthrax]

there's a whole lot more people who are unhappy who just haven't spoken up. 

 

Can we get a ballpark figure of how many, and how we know how many? Not that I distrust anyone here, but I would like to be sure there is an upset mob and not just a handful of people claiming there is an upset mob.

That is, how many people are upset/unhappy specifically about issues related to this topic of the "toxic debacle".

 

If I were to guess, including people who haven't participated in this discussion directly, I would estimate the figure of potentially unhappy (regarding this subject) people to be at around 16. That's based on a combination of

 

1) people who seem to be unhappy in this discussion

 

2) people who are more or less regular and/or oldtimer players/members in the community

and:

2a) who have been trolls or dicks in the past

or

2b) who have been drama-magnets in the past

or

2c) who are currently banned and/or have been banned in the past for disruptive behavior.

(or some combination of those)

 

But I don't know for certain that they all feel persecuted and discriminated against, or like they are being called "toxic" or whatever the actual issue here is. But that metric above is how i come to the number of players who might feel comfortable identifying as part of the so-called "toxic" group being around 16. Would you say that number matches up with your estimates or knowledge, kittypuppet?

Edited April 3, 2015 by Mumberthrax

[Mumberthrax]

What are they unhappy about specifically? being labeled in a negative light

What do they want to happen? not be labeled?

The impression I got was that it was more than just being explicitly labeled "toxic", rather also being viewed as exhibiting those attributes when it is allegedly unjust to do so, and consequently being treated with disdain or disrespect in certain ways because of being viewed as having the attributes of a "toxic" player.

 

But that's rather vague, hence my desire for clarification, in simple, readable terms, from the people who are upset.

 

edit: and really, if this is the case, I think jchance put it pretty plainly in reasonable phrasing early on in this thread:

 

IF YOU DON'T WANT OTHER PLAYERS TO CALL YOU "TOXIC" THEN STOP DOING WHATEVER IT IS THAT MAKES THEM FEEL LIKE YOU ARE A SHITBAG.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Mumberthrax

[robr]

i'd be willing to put good money on the concept that "most" people don't generally come over to the forums(or merely lurk if they do), they stick to the servers themselves and/or the various subreddits associated with towns/mcpublic, so i would be concerned if we start generalizing the community based on a single forum thread.

[d3north]

I can say that just counting off the top of my head, without naming names I can get about thirty or so people that fit mumbers criteria

[tobylane]

i'd be willing to put good money on the concept that "most" people don't generally come over to the forums(or merely lurk if they do), they stick to the servers themselves and/or the various subreddits associated with towns/mcpublic, so i would be concerned if we start generalizing the community based on a single forum thread.

 

Ban appeals probably brings in a lot of toxic people. Some of them, say Bmx, do seem to only be active for a short time after each ban.

 

D3 as mumber said we want to know a realistic figure, not just one unhappy person saying there's a mob of unhappy people. Could you show us some thinking behind your guess?

 

Edit: Exact same question and reasoning to Kitty then.

Edited April 4, 2015 by tobylane

[kittypuppet]

Can we get a ballpark figure of how many, and how we know how many?

That is, how many people are upset/unhappy specifically about issues related to this topic of the "toxic debacle".

If I were to guess, including people who haven't participated in this discussion directly, I would estimate the figure of potentially unhappy (regarding this subject) people to be at around 16 ...

But I don't know for certain that they all feel persecuted and discriminated against, or like they are being called "toxic" or whatever the actual issue here is. But that metric above is how i come to the number of players who might feel comfortable identifying as part of the so-called "toxic" group being around 16. Would you say that number matches up with your estimates or knowledge, kittypuppet?

 

Well, right now I have 40 people (and counting) listed who disapprove of grouping people and who are considered "toxic". 15(and counting) of these people are probably comfortable identifying as the toxic group and/or are considered "toxic" by many others.

These people:

Are labeled toxic

Are labeled toxic (and have left)

Are grouped with toxic people via association

Are grouped with toxic people via association (and have left)

Disapprove of grouping people as "toxic"

 

I'm not including people from JA's day, though I am considering it to show how long this issue has gone on (i.e. - Tharine and that incident)

There are a couple of names on the list from back then but that's because I personally have talked to these people about it when they came on and visited on mumble and/or ingame. As for how I know who goes in what group, I've talked to a lot of these people personally and have heard their thoughts and opinions over the year I've been here, a few others I've gathered from observation and how people react to what they've said.

 

edit: Do keep in mind this list is incomplete still

Edited April 4, 2015 by kittypuppet

[TheRandomnatrix]

i'd be willing to put good money on the concept that "most" people don't generally come over to the forums(or merely lurk if they do), they stick to the servers themselves and/or the various subreddits associated with towns/mcpublic, so i would be concerned if we start generalizing the community based on a single forum thread.

I played on these servers for a solid year before visiting the subreddit, let alone the forums. I can gaurentee most players don't give a crap about what goes on here so long as they can keep playing blocks with their friends.

[Ridiculous]

I played on these servers for a solid year before visiting the subreddit, let alone the forums. I can gaurentee most players don't give a crap about what goes on here so long as they can keep playing blocks with their friends.

Most players who got the toxic label didn't care either to begin with. Then all their cool block stuff got shut down and their friends pushed out of the community by a clique of staff and their asskissing orbiters who thought not liking someone's attitude was justification for using their power within the community to get rid of them. Typically shitty kiddy drama that should never have gone as far as it did on either side. I think that the toxic players that are still with us just want their friends and fun times with blocks to come back again.

 

The strategy of freezing them out doesn't seem to have worked so maybe bringing them back onto the staff team would be a more sensible option. At the very least future staff appointments should reflect more viewpoints from within the community, not just those that tow the party line or come solely from players who are pals with existing staff. That's the kind of thing I would suggest if I was an embittered toxic renegade.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Ridiculous

[Mumberthrax]

Most players who got the toxic label didn't care either to begin with. Then all their cool block stuff got shut down and their friends pushed out of the community by clique of staff and their asskissing orbiters who thought not liking someone's attitude was justification for using their power within the community to get rid of them. Typically shitty kiddy drama that should never have gone as far as it did on either side. I think that the toxic players that are still with us just want their friends and fun times with blocks to come back again.

 

The strategy of freezing them out doesn't seem to have worked so maybe bringing them back onto the staff team would be a more sensible option. At the very least future staff appointments should reflect more viewpoints from within the community, not just those that tow the party line or come solely from players who are pals with existing staff. That's the kind of thing I would suggest if I was an embittered toxic renegade.

 

You're saying that people have been banned unfairly, because they unjustly were labelled "toxic", and that there is a problem that exists which the bans were intended to remedy - but the bans did not fix it, so a possible solution is to not only unban these ostensibly unjustly banned players but to add them on as staff members. Did I get that right?

[Ridiculous]

You're saying that people have been banned unfairly, because they unjustly were labelled "toxic", and that there is a problem that exists which the bans were intended to remedy - but the bans did not fix it, so a possible solution is to not only unban these ostensibly unjustly banned players but to add them on as staff members. Did I get that right?

No on all points. I'll try to post a clarification tomorrow.

[tobylane]

Most players who got the toxic label didn't care either to begin with. Then all their cool block stuff got shut down and their friends pushed out of the community by clique of staff and their asskissing orbiters who thought not liking someone's attitude was justification for using their power within the community to get rid of them. Typically shitty kiddy drama that should never have gone as far as it did on either side. I think that the toxic players that are still with us just want their friends and fun times with blocks to come back again.

 

I thought the main point of this topic was that one group of people didn't like the staff using such a negative word to describe them as if they were all the same, I think you're doing the same now. Should I start a topic called The 'clique' Debacle or could we agree in this topic not to use either?

[EeHee2000]

Let me clarify,

It's not the term/word, it's the way we and everything we say are treated as a result of it. 

[Mumberthrax]

Let me clarify,

It's not the term/word, it's the way we and everything we say are treated as a result of it. 

 

Ok, so disregarding for the moment how many people are upset, moving on to the next question I have asked

 

 

What are they unhappy about specifically?

 

Eehee, do i understand correctly that you are unhappy because you perceive there to be a pattern of unfair treatment toward yourself and several other people by some members of the staff at nerd?

 

Or is it something other than just unfair treatment, something more specific or of a different nature? What behaviors specifically can we point to that are causing the problems? Can we refer to some concrete examples of actions that have caused this grievance? I'm not looking for an exhaustive list necessarily.

[EeHee2000]

Eehee, do i understand correctly that you are unhappy because you perceive there to be a pattern of unfair treatment toward yourself and several other people by some members of the staff at nerd?

That's the basic idea, yes. 

 

 

Or is it something other than just unfair treatment, something more specific or of a different nature? What behaviors specifically can we point to that are causing the problems? Can we refer to some concrete examples of actions that have caused this grievance? I'm not looking for an exhaustive list necessarily.

My issue is that I still get a lot of disdain for things long in the past when it's pretty damn clear that I've made steps to better myself. 

Before my words get misinterpreted, let me throw it out there that I'm well aware that I'm a huge dick on a fairly regular basis. Why, even today I ended up telling someone to do something rather rude on Survival within about 5 minutes of logging on. 

However, my actions on the forums are far less dickish than I find the public image of me to be represented as. 

From what I find, a lot of people are under the impression that I'm a troll and as a result it seems to be impossible for me to actually, y'know, make up for anything dickish I do. When I act like a shit, shouldn't there be some way for me to be taken seriously when I'm being serious? I could be in the middle of a legitimate discussion only to have every fucking word I say picked at because of someone's personal dislike for me.

Exhibit A; https://nerd.nu/forums/topic/3053-goodbye-posters-should-be-banned-when-they-insult-the-community/page-2

The same issue happens an awful lot with other 'toxic' people, barneygale after his return being a prime example. 

It's not so much being 'ignored' in the literal sense that I'm talking about, it's having every single goddamn thing you say be taken as an attack or something that needs to be countered. 

Exhibit B; A few weeks ago I sent a suggestion to two Head Admins regarding ban appeals, one of them was even saying "i will not discuss this matter any further with you" very early into the honestly polite discussion rather than being able to hold the talk about it. The other Head just completely disregarded absolutely everything I said with some snappy response unrelated to what I said, for reasons that are still unknown to me. 

The fact that I'm considered a troll/troublemaker/'toxic' means that no matter what I try to do, the negatives of what I say are blown far out of proportion and the positives seem to be downright ignored half the time, and over time the entire issue devolves into a huge snowball effect that I evidently have zero control over. I'll redirect your attention to both exhibits above, and I'll rest my case. 

Now, given all this, what actions can we take to go about fixing this? 

I'd encourage a good amount of you to reread everything that I just said from the most un-biased perspective you can manage. 

Edited April 6, 2015 by EeHee2000

[Narissis]

Then all their cool block stuff got shut down and their friends pushed out of the community by a clique of staff and their asskissing orbiters who thought not liking someone's attitude was justification for using their power within the community to get rid of them. Typically shitty kiddy drama that should never have gone as far as it did on either side.

Not to single you out, Ridiculous, but I think this kind of logic is a big part of the problem.

 

The staff don't moderate against "toxic" players because they "don't like them" or because they "disagree". At least not presently; I'm not bringing past drama into this.

 

They have a responsibility to maintain a welcoming community in which players can be comfortable. If players are being disruptive, then it's their job to take action. It has nothing to do with whether they agree with or like the individual, and everything to do with the impact that individual has on other players.

 

Now, I think the general thrust of this discussion is one we should be having. It's not fair to players for the staff to persecute and/or discriminate them outside of the bounds of the disciplinary actions incurred for specific disruptive behaviours.

 

But let's not be disingenuous and attempt to muddy the waters by accusing the staff of arbitrarily hating on opposing viewpoints. That's a strawman argument.

[tobylane]

My issue is that I still get a lot of disdain for things long in the past when it's pretty damn clear that I've made steps to better myself. 

Before my words get misinterpreted, let me throw it out there that I'm well aware that I'm a huge dick on a fairly regular basis. Why, even today I ended up telling someone to do something rather rude on Survival within about 5 minutes of logging on. 

The fact that I'm considered a troll/troublemaker/'toxic' means that no matter what I try to do, the negatives of what I say are blown far out of proportion and the positives seem to be downright ignored half the time, and over time the entire issue devolves into a huge snowball effect that I evidently have zero control over. I'll redirect your attention to both exhibits above, and I'll rest my case. 

 

If players are being disruptive, then it's [the staff's] job to take action. It has nothing to do with whether they agree with or like the individual, and everything to do with the impact that individual has on other players.

 

But let's not be disingenuous and attempt to muddy the waters by accusing the staff of arbitrarily hating on opposing viewpoints. That's a strawman argument.

 

Eehee you may be overestimating the change you've made in yourself. Maybe it's not the sort of change you can do half of and expect half the results. You start the snowball rolling by the half of you that is still toxic. That's the part of you that the admins have to counter by methods you don't like.

Edited April 7, 2015 by tobylane

[Magnyus]

I could be in the middle of a legitimate discussion only to have every fucking word I say picked at because of someone's personal dislike for me.

It's not so much being 'ignored' in the literal sense that I'm talking about, it's having every single goddamn thing you say be taken as an attack or something that needs to be countered.

Toby, are you fucking kidding me?

He LITERALLY just said that, and you immediately go off and nit pick phrases in his post that have nothing to do with the point he's trying to make. Eehee has been one the most level headed people in this thread (a discussion we wouldn't even be having without him) meanwhile you've been rambling on about minor details that don't even matter.

YES, EEHEE CAN BE A JACKASS. But when he legitimately wants to help out and provide his own input, people like you somehow disregard anything he says.

[TornadoHorse]

Remind me, what is the point in this thread? The last few comments I've read have been completely unrelated to the title. The solution to the problem has been summarised here many times, why are you all still discussing it?

[tobylane]

Toby, are you fucking kidding me?

He LITERALLY just said that, and you immediately go off and nit pick phrases in his post that have nothing to do with the point he's trying to make. Eehee has been one the most level headed people in this thread (a discussion we wouldn't even be having without him) meanwhile you've been rambling on about minor details that don't even matter.

YES, EEHEE CAN BE A JACKASS. But when he legitimately wants to help out and provide his own input, people like you somehow disregard anything he says.

 

I don't disregard it. I point it out when he asks why other people disregard him. According to him, I'm not sure I see other people disregarding him. He's not the first person to claim he's got the right trade off of having fun and knowing its toxic while having serious moments. I don't think people should be trying to do that. You're jumping down my throat, do you want us to discuss that?

[Mumberthrax]

Remind me, what is the point in this thread? The last few comments I've read have been completely unrelated to the title. The solution to the problem has been summarised here many times, why are you all still discussing it?

 

From what I've gathered, the point is that there are some people who are upset about the way they are treated by staff, and feel that there hasn't been a successful resolution to that achieved.

 

Maybe I've overlooked it, but the only solutions I've seen presented so far are:

 

IF YOU DON'T WANT OTHER PLAYERS TO CALL YOU "TOXIC" THEN STOP DOING WHATEVER IT IS THAT MAKES THEM FEEL LIKE YOU ARE A SHITBAG.

 

and

 

 

What are they unhappy about specifically? being labeled in a negative light

What do they want to happen? not be labeled?

Is that desire appropriate to implement? yes, seems quite reasonable, I wouldn't like it either

If so, what needs to be done to make it happen? stop using such terms, which appears to have happened

 

now the latter seems to seek to resolve the problem of the use of a label explicitly, but according to eehee it's not just about the label literally itself, but about discrimination that the label is a symptom of.

 

The former seems to be a plausible solution, but despite it being expressed at the beginning of the thread it doesn't seem to have done anything to stop people from feeling discriminated against, implying there is something more going on than just being treated poorly for being asshats - that's why I'm asking for specific grievances, specific examples of this unjust behavior so that we can identify whether there truly is discrimination going on or if its just people being butthurt over getting slaps on the wrist for being buttheads, or people who just like feeding into drama and controversy whether there is substance to it or not.

 

Just because a few people derail a discussion doesn't mean the thread should be shut down before a careful examination of the allegations has been conducted. Then again, maybe yet another thread discussing this should happen with pre-set rules about attacking one another.

[Mumberthrax]

I could be in the middle of a legitimate discussion only to have every fucking word I say picked at because of someone's personal dislike for me.

Exhibit A; https://nerd.nu/forums/topic/3053-goodbye-posters-should-be-banned-when-they-insult-the-community/page-2

Can you help me to understand what staff in exhibit A treated you in a discriminatory of unfair way, and what they did specifically? Are there deleted comments that we cannot see? Or is this one less about staff and more about other players? If so, can you help me to understand which of your comments were picked apart, and by whom? Currently this exhibit is a little opaque to me, and I am supposing it is because I am not looking in the right spot, or for the right things.

 

I can appreciate the irony of the situation here, that it may seem that I am picking apart your comments. I intend no disrespect in this, I am trying to understand the problem, to help build/clarify your case for you and identify a solution.

 

 

Exhibit B; A few weeks ago I sent a suggestion to two Head Admins regarding ban appeals, one of them was even saying "i will not discuss this matter any further with you" very early into the honestly polite discussion rather than being able to hold the talk about it. The other Head just completely disregarded absolutely everything I said with some snappy response unrelated to what I said, for reasons that are still unknown to me. 

 

Was the discussion about one of your ban appeals, or someone else's? Was it something that may have related to another players privacy? What was your intention in this discussion? Is it possible the head admin had a legitimate reason for saying "I will not discuss this matter any further with you"? There is a lot of missing information here, meaning to me that we cannot adequately gauge whether this is an example of systemic prejudice and discrimination against you or others without more context - in my opinion.

 

Similarly for the other head admin, I can appreciate that you may have perceived their response to have been snappy and unrelated, but without context it is difficult to tell whether this is a legitimate example of discrimination against a number of players, or if it is something else.

 

If any other players who feel they are slighted in a systematic way, discriminated against as part of a "toxic" label would like to offer any examples or evidence of that discrimination, to put some weight behind the allegations made here, I am sure that it would contribute to a resolution of the problem. I think right now the opposition to all of this takes the form of "there is no toxic debacle other than the contrived drama that you are creating. You act like a dick, you're going to be handled per the rules, and probably treated with less cordiality than you otherwise would as a consequence". therefore, the burden of proof, as it were, is on the claimants in this case.

 

edit: if there really are 30 to 40 people who feel they have been oppressed or discriminated against by staff, being viewed as toxic, then surely some of them are reading this thread and can present some specific examples of this systemic widespread problem.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Mumberthrax

[cdmrtbeok]

So Eehee wants to be rude, abrasive and a dick to people but also be treated with respect and listened to.

 

No.

 

This is not how the world operates anywhere and shouldn't operate like that here.

 

This is beyond pathetic if that this is what the crux of the issue is.

 

Edit: This goes for anyone too. You can't sometimes be a troll. Welcome to real life. If you are a troll, you are rude, you are hostile, you are a dick to people you don't like well buddy your credibility goes away. No one anywhere has the right to be a problem sometimes, be rude or difficult then turn around and be treated the same as people who are nice, make friends and play along. If you guys are suggesting we should start listening to the problem players with chips on their shoulders then that is an actual stupid thing to say and insist.

Edited April 7, 2015 by cdmrtbeok

[EeHee2000]

Can you help me to understand what staff in exhibit A treated you in a discriminatory of unfair way, and what they did specifically? Are there deleted comments that we cannot see? Or is this one less about staff and more about other players? If so, can you help me to understand which of your comments were picked apart, and by whom? Currently this exhibit is a little opaque to me, and I am supposing it is because I am not looking in the right spot, or for the right things.

 

I can appreciate the irony of the situation here, that it may seem that I am picking apart your comments. I intend no disrespect in this, I am trying to understand the problem, to help build/clarify your case for you and identify a solution.

 

 

Was the discussion about one of your ban appeals, or someone else's? Was it something that may have related to another players privacy? What was your intention in this discussion? Is it possible the head admin had a legitimate reason for saying "I will not discuss this matter any further with you"? There is a lot of missing information here, meaning to me that we cannot adequately gauge whether this is an example of systemic prejudice and discrimination against you or others without more context - in my opinion.

 

Similarly for the other head admin, I can appreciate that you may have perceived their response to have been snappy and unrelated, but without context it is difficult to tell whether this is a legitimate example of discrimination against a number of players, or if it is something else.

 

If any other players who feel they are slighted in a systematic way, discriminated against as part of a "toxic" label would like to offer any examples or evidence of that discrimination, to put some weight behind the allegations made here, I am sure that it would contribute to a resolution of the problem. I think right now the opposition to all of this takes the form of "there is no toxic debacle other than the contrived drama that you are creating. You act like a dick, you're going to be handled per the rules, and probably treated with less cordiality than you otherwise would as a consequence". therefore, the burden of proof, as it were, is on the claimants in this case.

 

edit: if there really are 30 to 40 people who feel they have been oppressed or discriminated against by staff, being viewed as toxic, then surely some of them are reading this thread and can present some specific examples of this systemic widespread problem.

I'd honestly just prefer to PM you with the logs of the two events in question over Skype or something, and allow you to draw your own conclusion from that. 

 

 

So Eehee wants to be rude, abrasive and a dick to people but also be treated with respect and listened to.

 

No.

 

This is not how the world operates anywhere and shouldn't operate like that here.

 

This is beyond pathetic if that this is what the crux of the issue is.

 

Edit: This goes for anyone too. You can't sometimes be a troll. Welcome to real life. If you are a troll, you are rude, you are hostile, you are a dick to people you don't like well buddy your credibility goes away. No one anywhere has the right to be a problem sometimes, be rude or difficult then turn around and be treated the same as people who are nice, make friends and play along. If you guys are suggesting we should start listening to the problem players with chips on their shoulders then that is an actual stupid thing to say and insist.

See, this is the exact thing that I'm finding irritating. Just like tobylane, you're picking out the worst of what I said. Nevermind the fact that I genuinely want to help nerd and have expressed that I know I'm a dick, just point out that I "want to be a dick" in order to get your point across. 

Where did you draw the conclusion that I "want" to be a dick? Did you even read my post at all? 

Despite everything I just said you pull a perfect example of the goddamn tired bullshit that I'm talking about. 

You say that if I'm a dick to people I don't like, my credibility goes away; tell me, have I been a dick in this thread? 

My plea to you is to treat me like a dick when I'm a dick and treat me like a non-dick when I'm not a dick. The same applies to other toxic people. 

If you can't do that, there's another solution to this entire thing gone. However, remember; this is is a Minecraft forum, are you really going to hold enough spite to completely and utterly ignore people over something like that? I'd assume you're more reasonable than that, come on now. 

Edited April 7, 2015 by EeHee2000

[Narissis]

While cmdrtbeok was very blunt in his post, Eehee, what he's trying to say is that if you have a certain persona that's going to colour the way people interact with you even if you're not displaying that persona during a particular conversation.

 

It's a "respect is earned, not given" kind of thing. Treating other players in a hostile manner is disrespectful to them, and turning around and expecting them to respect you in the next instant when you are trying to contribute is not going to work, even if the contribution you are trying to make is a valid one.

 

Having said that, I want to clarify that I think your comportment in this thread has been okay overall, Eehee. For what it's worth. I wouldn't hesitate to consider any suggestion you were to make if I were a staff member, because I think you've made it plain to see that you do want to genuinely improve the community.

 

I think we all have a role to play in communication, and that it's a two-way street. Getting back to the main topic of the thread, one thing that I believe is fundamentally important is for the staff to explain their rationale for not accepting a certain suggestion. Instead of just saying "we can't do that", go into a little detail as to why. For example, "we can't do that because it was tried in the past and did not work out" or "we can't do that because it's incompatible with plugins x, y, and z". Or even if it's subjective, "we *won't* do that because it risks having such-and-such impact on the community".

 

If people understood the rationale behind the decision to not implement their suggestions, they'd be less likely to assume the staff are ignoring them. Explaining the reasoning plays a double role: not only is it good in and of itself, it also demonstrates that the suggestion was heard and considered.